Opinion ID: 1308260
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Central United's Responsibility for Paying Wooldridge's Contractual Severance Benefits.

Text: Central United asserts that, because the terms of the severance agreement with Wooldridge were established by its former parent corporation as the seller of the company, that corporation, Central United Corporation, should bear the obligation to honor the agreement rather than visiting that liability on a company now owned by a parent corporation that was an outsider to the agreement. We find no merit in this suggestion. Wooldridge's action was based on a contract and had to be pursued against the entity that agreed to pay the contractual severance benefits. That entity was Central United. In the same light, Wooldridge's chapter 91A claims were properly brought against Central United because it was the entity that served as his employer for purposes of invoking the remedies that are available against an employer under that legislation.