Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Employment Law Blogs -> Maryland Employment Law
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Employment Law
: Maryland Employment LawThe Long Arms of the Maryland Wage Payment and Collection Law
By James Rubin, Esq.
But how much work must an employee perform in Maryland? Employees often spend time in more than one jurisdiction here in the "DMV." That questions was largely answered in Himes Associates v. Anderson. There, the employee, Mr. Anderson lived in Maryland but worked for a Virginia employer and spent most of his work time in that state. Mr. Anderson was tasked with overseeing the construction of a building in Virginia, but, as a part of those responsibilities, he was required to present a proposal in Baltimore and attend meetings twice a month in that city. On two other occasions, the employee was asked to visit a work site in Gaithersburg and work on a project in Aberdeen.
As it turns out the Maryland Wage Payment and Collection Law has long arms. An employer is subject to the Maryland Law if instructs an employee to be present at a work site. According to the Court, "[t]he plain language . . . covers the situation in which a company outside of Maryland directs its employee to go to a work site in Maryland." Because the employee attended meetings twice a month in Baltimore, the Court concluded that the Virginia employer is subject to the Maryland Wage Payment and Collection Law.
This case, Himes Associates, could well be applied to an employee who works from home in Maryland for an out-of-state employer. I suspect we will be seeing such a case in the near future.
Full post as published by Maryland Employment Law on February 21, 2020 (boomark / email).
Self Defense
It's legal to defend yourself and your family
Bankruptcy Law
A complete prime (pre-2005)
Collection Agencies and Creditors
How to deal and stop the harassment
Dumb New York Laws
Stupid Laws in the Empire State
UAB Health System and Franklin Collection Service
allegedly violated the RICO Act in collection practices on delinquent patient accounts.
UnitedHealth
Settles Payment Suits for $350 Million
Wells Fargo Settles New Jersey State Investigation into Pick-a-Payment Mortgages
Wells Fargo Settles New Jersey State Investigation into Pick-a-Payment Mortgages
Pesticides
Long-Term Exposure Linked to Diabetes
Long-Term Insurance Suit
Settled for $15 Million
Heartland Payment Systems
Faces Class Action









