Melbye v. Accelerated Payment Technologies, Inc.

MEMORANDUM

Accelerated Payment Technologies (“APT”) appeals the district court’s denial of its renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law. Reviewing the district court’s denial of APT’s motion de novo and the jury’s verdict for substantial evidence, see EEOC v. Go Daddy Software, Inc., 581 F.3d 951, 961 (9th Cir.2009), we affirm.

The jury’s finding that APT breached an oral or implied-in-fact contract between Richard Melbye and Geoffrey Knapp for post-termination residual commissions is supported by substantial evidence. APT argues that the employee handbook was incorporated into the at-will employment agreement, and that the handbook precludes post-termination commissions. We are unpersuaded. The handbook was not incorporated into the employment agreement. But even if it were, the handbook and the employment agreement did not constitute a fully integrated contract because the handbook states that “[i]t does not contain the complete terms or conditions of any of the company’s current benefit plans and policies.” The jury could interpret the effect of the handbook and weigh extrinsic evidence of the parties’ intent. See City of Hope Nat’l Med. Ctr. v. Genentech, Inc., 43…