On the prior motion, the court determined that appellant's claim was not properly substantiated, since appellant was unable to produce a written contract, and his claim that he was hired by his brother, or by the AIP himself, pursuant to an oral agreement, to work 40 hours per week at an annual salary of $100,000 was not supported by tax records or contemporaneous time records documenting the hours he worked and the services he provided, but was based only on his own initial...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
