holding that the MWPCL should be read broadly to confer a private cause of action for unauthorized deductions under section 3-503
How later courts described this case
- holding that the MWPCL should be read broadly to confer a private cause of action for unauthorized deductions under section 3-503
- concluding that employees have a right to bring a private cause of action under the MWPCL to recover unlawfully withheld wages that result from miscalculating the amount of wages exempt from garnishment
- holding that the MWPCL generally provides an employee with a cause of action against an employer for both the failure to pay wages on time and for “the refusal of employers to pay wages lawfully due.”
- holding that the MWPCL provides an employee with a cause of action against an employer for both the failure to pay wages on time and for “the refusal of employers to pay wages lawfully due”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
ADKINS, J.,
concurring and dissenting.
Respectfully, I disagree with the Majority’s holding that Ms. Marshall had a private cause of action under Md.Code (1993, 2008 Repl. Vol., 2013 Cum.Supp.), § 3-507.2 of the Labor and Employment Article (“LE”). I agree with the Circuit Court and the Court of Special Appeals that under a plain language interpretation, an employee can only bring a § 3-507.2 action, with its attendant treble damages and attorney’s fees, if the employer “fails to pay an employee in accordance with § 3-502 or § 3-505.” LE § 3-507.2. Safeway violated neither LE § 3-502 nor LE § 3-505. Rather, in response to a wage garnishment, it made a deduction from Ms. Marshall’s wages that failed to comply with LE § 3-503. If the Legislature had intended to allow an employee to bring a § 3-507.2 action for the employer’s failure to comply with LE § 3-503, it certainly knew how to say so. I agree with all other aspects of the Majority opinion, and like the Majority, I would affirm the judgment of the Court of Special Appeals.