Skip to main content

Bermel v. BlueRadios, Inc

COLOCTAPPFebruary 23, 2017No. 16CA0102Cited 4 times
Mixed ResultBlueRadios, Inc
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
summary judgment

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Wage TheftBreach of Contract

Excerpt

Breach of Contract—Unjust Enrichment—Colorado Wage Protection Act—Civil Theft—Conversion—Economic Loss Rule—Attorney Fees. Bermel entered into a "Contractor Agreement" with BlueRadios, Inc. under which he provided engineering services to BlueRadios. He also signed a "Proprietary Information and Inventions Agreement" (PIAA). The parties later ended their relationship. Anticipating that he might end up in litigation over unpaid wages, Bermel breached the PIAA by forwarding to his personal email account thousands of BlueRadios emails and attachments, some of which contained proprietary information. Bermel sent a demand letter to BlueRadios for unpaid wages, which BlueRadios paid. Bermel thereafter filed a lawsuit against BlueRadios asserting claims for breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and violation of the Colorado Wage Protection Act (CWPA). BlueRadios filed counterclaims against him, including breach of contract civil theft, under CRS § 18-4-405 and conversion. The court granted summary judgment in favor of BlueRadios on Bermel's CWPA claim, and following trial, found Bermel liable on all of BlueRadios' counterclaims. On appeal, Bermel contended that the trial court erred when it denied his motion for summary judgment, in which he argued that the economic loss rule barred BlueRadios' claim for civil theft. Because the economic loss rule is a judicial construct and a civil theft claim is a statutory cause of action, the economic loss rule does not preclude a cause of action under the civil theft statute. Bermel also argued that the trial court erred in granting BlueRadios' motion for summary judgment on his CWPA claim, contending that the court failed to apply the CWPA's definition of "employee" when it concluded he was an independent contractor. The evidence attached to BlueRadios' motion for summary judgment did not establish that Bermel was free from control and direction under his contract or that he was customarily engaged in an independent trade, occupation

What This Ruling Means

**Bermel v. BlueRadios, Inc.: Contract Worker Wins Some, Loses Some** This case involved an engineering contractor named Bermel who worked for BlueRadios, Inc. under two agreements: a contractor agreement for his services and a separate agreement about protecting the company's confidential information. When their business relationship ended, Bermel wasn't paid for his work. Expecting a legal fight over his unpaid wages, he broke his confidentiality agreement by forwarding company information to his personal email account. The court issued a mixed ruling. While specific details about which claims succeeded aren't provided in this excerpt, the case involved multiple legal issues including unpaid wages, breach of contract, and violations of Colorado's wage protection laws. The court had to weigh Bermel's legitimate wage claims against his violation of the confidentiality agreement. **What this means for workers:** Even when you have valid wage claims, breaking other parts of your employment agreements can complicate your case. If you're not being paid what you're owed, it's important to pursue your wage claims through proper legal channels rather than taking actions that could violate other agreements you've signed. Document everything and seek legal advice before taking any steps that might breach your contracts.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.