The plaintiff, a retired insurance producer, brought a summary judgment motion seeking a declaration that both 'assigned' and 'developed' clients should be included in the calculation of his deferred compensation pool under his employment contract.
The defendant employer argued that only 'developed' clients were included.
The court found no ambiguity in the employment contract, concluding that the clear language of the agreement allocated only 'new customers' (developed clients) to the deferred compensation pool.
The plaintiff's motion and claim were dismissed.
