IBJNews

HHGregg manager sues over company's denial of bonuses

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A huge life insurance payout that HHGregg Inc. collected after Executive Chairman Jerry Throgmartin died last year has spawned a class-action lawsuit against the company.

Former accounting manager Dwain Underwood charges that the $40 million payout should have been factored into the calculation the company used to determine whether he and other employees were entitled to incentive bonuses.

Underwood filed his lawsuit in late February in Marion Superior Court. He is seeking class-action status on behalf of about 40 former or current employees of HHGregg.
 

otr-hhgregg-031813-15col.jpg A former employee says HHGregg shortchanged its workers on their bonuses. (IBJ file photo)

He claims HHGregg should have paid him a $25,000 bonus based on the company’s fiscal 2012 earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, or EBITDA, of $144.4 million.

“They did include the proceeds in their internal books; that’s black and white,” Underwood’s lawyer, Eric Pavlack, said. “But they chose not to honor their commitment.”

Underwood claims HHGregg wrongly based bonuses on “adjusted EBITDA,” which excluded the life insurance payout.

He is suing the company for breach of contract and unjust enrichment.

An HHGregg spokeswoman said the company does not comment on pending litigation.

Pavlack said Underwood voluntarily left HHGregg on good terms in late January.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. John, unfortunately CTRWD wants to put the tank(s) right next to a nature preserve and at the southern entrance to Carmel off of Keystone. Not exactly the kind of message you want to send to residents and visitors (come see our tanks as you enter our city and we build stuff in nature preserves...

  2. 85 feet for an ambitious project? I could shoot ej*culate farther than that.

  3. I tried, can't take it anymore. Untill Katz is replaced I can't listen anymore.

  4. Perhaps, but they've had a very active program to reduce rainwater/sump pump inflows for a number of years. But you are correct that controlling these peak flows will require spending more money - surge tanks, lines or removing storm water inflow at the source.

  5. All sewage goes to the Carmel treatment plant on the White River at 96th St. Rainfall should not affect sewage flows, but somehow it does - and the increased rate is more than the plant can handle a few times each year. One big source is typically homeowners who have their sump pumps connect into the sanitary sewer line rather than to the storm sewer line or yard. So we (Carmel and Clay Twp) need someway to hold the excess flow for a few days until the plant can process this material. Carmel wants the surge tank located at the treatment plant but than means an expensive underground line has to be installed through residential areas while CTRWD wants the surge tank located further 'upstream' from the treatment plant which costs less. Either solution works from an environmental control perspective. The less expensive solution means some people would likely have an unsightly tank near them. Carmel wants the more expensive solution - surprise!

ADVERTISEMENT