Archive | Wrongful discharge

RSS feed for this section

Great Falls Clinic v. Mont. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court

Great Falls Clinic v. Mont. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court, 2016 MT 245 (Oct. 4, 2016) (McGrath, C.J.) (7-0, petition granted, aff’d)

Issue: Whether the Wrongful Discharge from Employment Act (WDEA) applies to the parties’ relationship.

Short Answer: No.

Affirmed

Facts: Lisa Warrington was offered a job at Great Falls Clinic on October 7, 2014, while she was employed by Benefis Hospital. Warrington accepted the offer and gave two weeks’ notice to Benefis. Warrington signed a written employment contract on October 10, with both parties agreeing her employment would begin October 27, 2014. On October 24, Warrington’s last day at Benefis, the clinic called and told Warrington it would not employ her after all.

Warrington sued the clinic for breach of contract, promissory estoppel and bad faith.…

Moe v. Butte-Silver Bow County

Moe v. Butte-Silver Bow County, 2016 MT 103 (May 10, 2016) (Baker, J.) (5-0, aff’d)

Issue: (1) Whether the district court properly granted partial summary judgment to the county on Moe’s claim that it violated Montana’s open meeting laws; (2) whether the district court properly granted partial summary judgment to the county on Moe’s claim that it violated Montana’s public participation laws; (3) whether the district court properly granted partial summary judgment to the county on Moe’s § 1983 claim; (4) whether the district court erred in holding as a matter of law that the county did not discharge Moe in violation of its own policies or for refusing to violate public policy; and (5) whether the district court erred in holding that Moe is entitled to a trial on her claim that the county terminated her employment without good cause.…

Davis v. DPHHS

Davis v. DPHHS, 2015 MT 264 (Sept. 8, 2015) (Cotter, J.) (5-0, aff’d)

Issue: Whether the district court properly held as a matter of law that Davis was properly terminated for good cause.

Short Answer: Yes.

Summary judgment affirmed

Facts: Donna Davis began working as an attorney for DPHHS in 2006, and was terminated in July 2011 after five years of employment. In January 2010, Davis’s superiors began receiving complaints about her work product, her manner toward coworkers, and her repeated violations of department policies. On April 19, 2011, via a late-night email to chief legal counsel for DPHHS Bernie Jacobs and the HR director for DPHHS, Kathy Bremer. Davis told Jacobs and Bremer she had been verbally assaulted by her supervisor and was fearful of going to work.…

Cartwright v. Scheels All Sports, Inc.

Cartwright v. Scheels All Sports, Inc., 2013 MT 158 (June 18, 2013) (5-0) (McKinnon, J.)

Issue: Whether the district court erred in (1) denying summary judgment to Cartwright and allowing Scheels to argue good cause for terminating Cartwright’s employment; (2) failing to sanction Scheels for discovery abuse and destruction of evidence; (3) denying Cartwright’s motion to amend the pleadings; (4) allowing Scheels’ expert witness to testify about ultimate issues of fact and law; and (5) allowing witnesses to testify about rumors heard at Scheels about Cartwright.

Short Answer: (1) No; (2) no; (3) no; (4) no; and (5) no.

Affirmed

 …

Sullivan v. Continental Construction

Sullivan v. Continental Construction of Montana, LLC, 2013 MT 106 (April 23, 2013) (5-0) (Morris, J.)

Issue: (1) Whether the district court properly held that Continental had good cause to terminate Sullivan’s employment; (2) whether Continental improperly considered hearsay evidence in deciding to terminate Sullivan’s employment; (3) whether the district court improperly considered hearsay evidence in deciding that Continental had good cause to terminate Sullivan’s employment; and (4) whether the district court properly concluded that Continental did not violate the provisions of its employee handbook when it terminated Sullivan’s employment.

Short Answer: (1) Yes; (2) no; (3) no; and (4) yes.

Affirmed