Sec. 2. Every such person, firm, corporation, limited
liability company, or association who shall fail to make payment of
wages to any such employee as provided in section 1 of this chapter
shall be liable to the employee for the amount of unpaid wages, and the
amount may be recovered in any court having jurisdiction of a suit to
recover the amount due to the employee. The court shall order as costs
in the case a reasonable fee for the plaintiff's attorney and court costs.
In addition, if the court in any such suit determines that the person,
firm, corporation, limited liability company, or association that failed
to pay the employee as provided in section 1 of this chapter was not
acting in good faith, the court shall order, as liquidated damages for the
failure to pay wages, that the employee be paid an amount equal to two
(2) times the amount of wages due the employee.
Formerly: Acts 1933, c.47, s.2. As amended by P.L.144-1986,
SEC.8; P.L.8-1993, SEC.274; P.L.193-2015, SEC.1.
Notes of Decisions
St. Vincent Hosp. & Health Care Ctr., Inc. v. Steele, 766 N.E.2d 699 (Ind. 2002).
· cites it 11× “employer: [A]s liquidated damages for such failure, [shall] pay to such employee for each day that the amount due to him remains unpaid ten percent (10%) of the amount due to him in addition thereto, not exceeding double the amount of wages due, and said damages may be recovered…”
Stampco Const. Co., Inc. v. Guffey, 572 N.E.2d 510 (Ind. Ct. App. 1991).
· cites it 32× “The argument *514 that the salary was paid so I.C. § 22-2-5-2 does not apply is without merit.”
Naugle v. Beech Grove City Schs., 864 N.E.2d 1058 (Ind. 2007).
· cites it 11× “We agree with these opinions of the Court of Appeals that conclude there is no generic “good faith” defense to the Wage Payment Statute. Indiana Code section 22-2-5-2 states [e]very such person, firm, corporation, limited liability company, or association who shall fail to make…”
Cox v. Town of Rome City, 764 N.E.2d 242 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 24× “§ 86-8-3-4, insofar as pertinent, applies only to the action terminating Cox's employment; it does not prevent any action by Cox seeking compensation owed to him or penalties resulting from the late payment of his wages under Indiana Code § 22-2-5-2 (Burns Code Ed. Repl.”
E & L Rental Equip., Inc. v. Gifford, 744 N.E.2d 1007 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001).
· cites it 16× “Gifford requested treble damages, attorney fees, costs and interest under Ind.Code § 22-2-5-2. This matter went to trial on June 6, 2000, and the trial court issued Findings & Judgment on June 23, 2000.”
Prime Mortg. USA, Inc. v. Nichols, 885 N.E.2d 628 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 8× “See Ind.Code § 22-2-5-2 (“[T]he court shall tax and assess as costs in said case a reasonable fee for the plaintiffs attorney or attorneys.”
Reel v. Clarian Health Partners, Inc., 917 N.E.2d 714 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 21× “The court's order provides in relevant part: The Defendant correctly argues that Indiana Code § 22-2-9-4 requires all civil actions brought through application of Indiana Code § 22-2-5-2 to be brought by the Attorney General or his designee.”
Helmuth v. Distance Learning Sys. Indiana, Inc., 837 N.E.2d 1085 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 10× “2002) (quoting Ind.Code § 22-2-5-2). In St. Vincent, our supreme court concluded that the Wage Payment Statute "governs both the frequency and amount an employer must pay its employee.”
Tobin v. Ruman, 819 N.E.2d 78 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 8× “" I.C. § 22-2-5-2. While the statute does not define "wages," we have concluded in the past that "wages" are compensation paid on a regular basis for work performed by the employee on an ongoing basis.”
Wells Fargo Ins., Inc. v. Land, 932 N.E.2d 195 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 18× “35, representing commissions and penalties, pursuant to Ind.Code § 22-2-5-2, and $23,812.67 in attorney fees.”
Valadez v. R.T. Enter., Inc., 647 N.E.2d 331 (Ind. Ct. App. 1995).
· cites it 13× “50 for costs, and $924 for failing to pay commissions in a timely manner pursuant to Ind. Code § 22-2-5-2 . The $924 represents the $308 unpaid at the time of trial plus double that amount as liquidated damages.”
Comm'r of Labor Ex Rel. Scialdone v. an Island, LLC, 948 N.E.2d 1189 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 14× “” I.C. § 22-2-5-2. The Scialdones argue that the jurisdictional provision of Section 22-2-5-2 creates preferred venue in any Indiana court with jurisdiction over actions for unpaid wage claims, whether those actions are brought directly by the Attorney General or by a designated…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.