38 Consol employees claim breach of contract

By Kyla Asbury | May 15, 2014

MOUNDSVILLE - Thirty-eight men are suing Consol Energy Inc. after they claim it breached its contract with them by failing to abide by its inceptive plan.


MOUNDSVILLE - Thirty-eight men are suing Consol Energy Inc. after they claim it breached its contract with them by failing to abide by its inceptive plan.


During employment for , Consol had in effect an incentive plan that it knew the 38 employees replied upon, according to a complaint filed April 14 in Marshall Circuit Court.


The plaintiffs claim fulfilled all of their lawful obligations and duties in order to obtain, retain and not forfeit each and every restricted stock unit awarded to them, however, Consol has not delivered or issued all of their vested restricted stock units.


Consol's refusal to deliver to each plaintiff all of his vested, due and owing restricted stock units is predicated upon the same common plan, scheme, determination and/or purported justification predicating the defendant's refusal to deliver all vested, due and owing restricted stock units to all employees similarly or exactly situated to the plaintiffs, according to the suit.


The plaintiffs claim Consol was contractually bound to deliver the restricted stock units.


Consol's representations respecting its incentive plan, including its representations respecting the accelerated vesting of restricted stock unit awards, were reasonably relied upon by each plaintiff to his detriment, according to the suit.


The plaintiffs claim by its refusal to deliver the RSUs, or monies in an amount equivalent to their value, Consol has converted each plaintiff's valuable assets to its own use.


As a direct and proximate result of Consol's breach of contract and/or tortious conduct, each plaintiff is entitled to recover the RSUs and the damages incurred as a result of any loss due to the defendant's conduct; consequential and incidental damages; damages due to the unavailability and/or deprivation of the due and owing RSUs; and all other compensatory damages allowed by law, according to the suit.


The plaintiffs are seeking the damages with pre- and post-judgment interest.


They are being represented by Anthony I. Werner and Joseph J. John of John & Werner Law Offices PLLC.


Marshall Circuit Court case number: 14-C-57

More News

The Record Network