Demoinerie, J. v. Emball’iso, Inc.

J-A01038-19 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 JULIEN DEMOINERIE : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA : v. : : : EMBALL'ISO, INC. : : Appellant : No. 1238 EDA 2018 Appeal from the Judgment Entered March 28, 2018 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Civil Division at No(s): April Term, 2016, No. 03190 BEFORE: OTT, J., STABILE, J., and McLAUGHLIN, J. MEMORANDUM BY McLAUGHLIN, J.: FILED MAY 14, 2019 Emball’Iso, Inc., appeals from the judgment entered in favor of Julien Demoinerie on his negligent misrepresentation claim. Emball’Iso argues the court erred in denying its motions for summary judgment, a directed verdict, or judgment notwithstanding the verdict (“JNOV”), in denying its request for jury instructions, in precluding a witness’s testimony, and in denying its request for a remittitur of the jury award. We affirm. The trial court recounted the facts as follows: Plaintiff Julien Demoinerie . . . is a native of France and a French Citizen. Defendant Emball’Iso, Inc. . . . is a manufacturing company headquartered in France with facilities in many countries. [Demoinerie] began working for [Emball’Iso] at its Shanghai, China facility in 2010, eventually becoming General Manager. While in China, [Demoinerie] married a Chinese citizen and the couple had a daughter. In May 2014, [Emball’Iso]’s CEO/President, Pierre Casoli (“Casoli”) approached [Demoinerie] about moving to the United States to work in a new facility in Philadelphia. [Demoinerie] J-A01038-19 expressed an interest in serving as Plant Manager. On June 10, 2014, [Demoinerie] and Casoli executed an agreement (“Production Manager Agreement”) under the terms of which [Demoinerie] would instead work as the Production Manager of the Philadelphia facility, reporting directly to Casoli. Under the terms of the Production Manager Agreement, [Demoinerie] would receive an annual salary of $100,000. In the event of termination, [Demoinerie] would be paid two months’ salary. The effective date of the Production Manager Agreement was August 15, 2014. Prior to signing the Production Manager Agreement, [Demoinerie] was instructed to train a replacement and resign his position in Shanghai. [Demoinerie] expressed his concern about working with Vice President Ronald Stern (“Stern”) in the Philadelphia facility before signing the Production Manager Agreement. Casoli assured him they would serve as a “duality” with neither being subordinate to the other. [Demoinerie] testified that Casoli appealed to his commitment to the company and Casoli. On August 12, 2014, prior to the effective date of the Production Manager Agreement and before [Demoinerie] moved to Philadelphia, [Emball’Iso] petitioned the United States government for a visa to permit [Demoinerie] to work in the United States. On the visa [petition], [Emball’Iso] represented that it wished to extend an offer of employment to [Demoinerie] as “Plant Manager” of its Philadelphia facility, reporting directly to Vice President [Stern]. The visa petition stated [Demoinerie]’s intended dates of employment as August 11, 2014 to August 11, 2017. [[Demoinerie] reviewed a draft of the visa [petition] prior to its submission and was concerned about the change in reporting structure.] [Based on the visa ...

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals