[nlh]

It is absolutely an adult form of bullying. Filing a lawsuit, though many will trivialize it, is anything but trivial. It requires time, energy, and most importantly, $$ to be spent on a lawyer. I'm still amazed that so many people go through with it for petty matters or fights.

I've had customers rent a car from my company, damage it, and then sue us to try and recover the damages after we bill them for it. They spend double the cost of the damages to have their lawyer file the lawsuit, and every one has lost the lawsuit so far. So why do they even bother? Because it gives people in a less-powerful position some semblance of control/power (which, by no coincidence, is where bullying often comes from.) - "This car was damaged under my watch, they used my deposit to bill me, I signed a contract agreeing to this scenario, but I'm not happy about any of this and I'm used to getting my way, so I'm going to sue."

Anyway - that's not advice, just background. My advice - if the situation is indeed as you present, is that as painful as it is, you need to defend yourself. If you don't, you risk the court entering what's called a 'default judgment', which is basically a loss on your part.

I'm not sure what the amount is (you said it's more than you were paid, but I don't know what order of magnitude that is) - if it's small-claims-scale, you do not need a lawyer and you can defend yourself in person in court. If it's above the small-claims threshold, you'll need to take it a step further.

In either case, I suggest you at least speak to a lawyer first. It will cost something, but it won't cost thousands to have a conversation, and it may not even cost that much to respond.

One thing that's important to remember: It gets VERY VERY VERY expensive to take a lawsuit beyond the initial filing and angry-letter-exchanging phase. Nobody wants to go there - not the plaintiff, and not the defendant. Filing a response costs time and money, but after that, a world of pain gets opened up with discovery, etc. etc. And that's on both sides -- to the tune of tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars. So honestly, very few people actually want to go that far unless there is a lot of money at stake.

So likely, you'll want to at least make contact with the plaintiff and figure out what they really want (it might be nothing more than making you pay for a lawyer to respond), but either way - get a lawyer and at least have a conversation.

[rayiner]

(None of this should be construed to be legal advice...)

If it's in federal court on what seems like a breach of contract claim, then it's probably there on diversity jurisdiction and thus the amount of claimed damages is over $75,000. So probably not something he can take to small claims, unfortunately.

The real question is, who sues a student for > $75,000 for breaching an employment agreement?

[larrys]

"The real question is, who sues a student for > $75,000 for breaching an employment agreement?"

I suspect that there is more going on here than meets the eye or has been disclosed exactly for that reason. [1] Notwithstanding the parent's comment about the games people play it's really hard to make a judgement (as with anything) w/o hearing the info from both sides.

Now had the OP not been using a throwaway account you could at least infer some legitimacy (however slim) because the poster would be known at least a bit. (Or maybe more than slim if the commenter was well known to the HN community). That is not the case here. This is not to say that the employer doesn't suck and that the case is frivolous but merely to point out a possible reality.

[1] I've been doing business for a long long time and have come in contact with many nutty people obviously but in general the limiting factor as has been pointed out is the amount of effort and money it takes to file and carry through with a law suit is not trivial. Would also add at this point is that it is typical to receive the "scary lawyer letter" prior to the filing of a lawsuit and the OP doesn't mention receiving that.

[niggler]

"Now had the OP not been using a throwaway account you could at least infer some legitimacy (however slim) because the poster would be known at least a bit. "

Absolute idiocy. Especially with ongoing litigation, it's a really bad idea to associate your name with the situation

[larrys]

The reason for the poster not using their name doesn't matter relative to my comment which has to do with the fact that if you knew them or something about them you might give more weight to what they have said in the absence of all the information being considered.

Obviously there is a reason they aren't using their identity.

Would you feel the same if you heard a story from a friend you knew and trusted vs. overheard a story being told from a complete stranger? That's the point I am making. That you are more likely to believe something from someone you know something about rather than a complete stranger. Has nothing to do with why they have decided to not reveal their identity. What about my comment indicates to you that I think they should have revealed who they are exactly?

If I revealed my identity and I was actually a well known person you might give more credence (and respect) instead of reacting with "idiocy" to what I've said. And that would make sense. Just like people will react to what PG says with more respect then a random HN poster and cut more slack.

Thanks for saying "absolute idiocy" and assuming that I don't know something as simple and obvious as "it's a really bad idea to associate your name with the situation".

[larrys]

"but after that, a world of pain gets opened up with discovery"

That's actually an excellent avenue to cause problems for the plaintiff (and get them to drop the suit) since they open themselves up to discovery which many will not want to do simply because of the time or because it will open up a can of worms.