IBJNews

State Supreme Court won’t hear ex-Chamber director’s case

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A former executive director of the Greater Brownsburg Chamber of Commerce has run out of legal options in his attempt to collect nearly $100,000 in compensation he claimed the organization owed him.

Walter B. Duncan’s request that the Indiana Supreme Court hear his case that he lost at the appellate court level was rejected by justices Tuesday.

Duncan’s beef with the Brownsburg Chamber stems from his forced resignation as executive director in March 2010, and his claim that the organization owed him $94,377.93 in unpaid wages and benefits.

He signed a three-year contract in March 2009, retroactive to January 2009, and had about 21 months remaining on the deal at his termination.

Duncan sued the Chamber in Hendricks Superior Court for breach of contract, charging that the agency should have paid him for the entirety of the contract. As executive director, he earned an annual salary of $50,400.

The Chamber instead compensated Duncan $15,507.69 for one week of work and three weeks of vacation after he agreed to resign.

A Hendricks County judge in July 2011 ruled in favor of the Chamber, but not before rejecting a legal move by both the Chamber and Duncan to avoid trial through a summary judgment.

Both Duncan and the Chamber appealed the decision. A panel of state appellate court judges in April came to the same conclusion as the trial judge, but said she should have indeed granted the Chamber’s motion and avoided trial altogether through a summary judgment.

Relying on a state Supreme Court case dating to 1872, the appellate judges agreed that the Chamber need only compensate Duncan for a 30-day period following the termination for “convenience” notice, pursuant to the terms of the contract, and not for the entirety of the deal.

“We have little hesitation in explicitly adopting the proposition, and therefore do not accept Duncan’s argument, which, if adopted, would entitle him to what could only be called the windfall of being compensated for the remainder of the contract term—for services he did not provide—as though he had never been terminated,” Judge Cale Bradford wrote.

Further, by their calculations, the judges said the Chamber overpaid Duncan and should have compensated Duncan $14,775.63 instead of $15,507.69.

The Chamber operates on a tight budget, and a ruling in Duncan’s favor would have been financially “devastating,” said Matthew Dumas, the Chamber’s lawyer. Dumas declined to say how much the Chamber spent in legal fees to fight Duncan.

Chamber directors terminated Duncan during a March 18, 2010, meeting by a 10-2 vote. Board meeting minutes showed the dismissal stemmed from the fact that “significant friction and resistance continues to prevent the smooth and efficient operations of the Chamber.”

Following the meeting, two directors informed Duncan of his termination at a McDonald’s restaurant and gave him the option to resign.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • McDonald's
    They fired him at a McDonald's?!
  • Chamber of Commerce
    The old right to work state chamber of commerce anti worker sentiment has weaseled out of paying the guy. The money has been spent on the legal battle. He should know by his own anti worker agenda that this state does not have any rights for the employees. He resigned and no recourse exists here. No wrongful dismissal, no hostile working conditions just a medieval kingdom

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. I am not by any means judging whether this is a good or bad project. It's pretty simple, the developers are not showing a hardship or need for this economic incentive. It is a vacant field, the easiest for development, and the developer already has the money to invest $26 million for construction. If they can afford that, they can afford to pay property taxes just like the rest of the residents do. As well, an average of $15/hour is an absolute joke in terms of economic development. Get in high paying jobs and maybe there's a different story. But that's the problem with this ask, it is speculative and users are just not known.

  2. Shouldn't this be a museum

  3. I don't have a problem with higher taxes, since it is obvious that our city is not adequately funded. And Ballard doesn't want to admit it, but he has increased taxes indirectly by 1) selling assets and spending the money, 2) letting now private entities increase user fees which were previously capped, 3) by spending reserves, and 4) by heavy dependence on TIFs. At the end, these are all indirect tax increases since someone will eventually have to pay for them. It's mathematics. You put property tax caps ("tax cut"), but you don't cut expenditures (justifiably so), so you increase taxes indirectly.

  4. Marijuana is the safest natural drug grown. Addiction is never physical. Marijuana health benefits are far more reaching then synthesized drugs. Abbott, Lilly, and the thousands of others create poisons and label them as medication. There is no current manufactured drug on the market that does not pose immediate and long term threat to the human anatomy. Certainly the potency of marijuana has increased by hybrids and growing techniques. However, Alcohol has been proven to destroy more families, relationships, cause more deaths and injuries in addition to the damage done to the body. Many confrontations such as domestic violence and other crimes can be attributed to alcohol. The criminal activities and injustices that surround marijuana exists because it is illegal in much of the world. If legalized throughout the world you would see a dramatic decrease in such activities and a savings to many countries for legal prosecutions, incarceration etc in regards to marijuana. It indeed can create wealth for the government by collecting taxes, creating jobs, etc.... I personally do not partake. I do hope it is legalized throughout the world.

  5. Build the resevoir. If built this will provide jobs and a reason to visit Anderson. The city needs to do something to differentiate itself from other cities in the area. Kudos to people with vision that are backing this project.

ADVERTISEMENT