Chapter 16 EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIPS:
CONTRACTUAL AND TORT THEORIES
Labor & Employment Law 136
Case Questions
16.1, Adams v. Uno Restaurants Inc., p. 605
1. (Q.) Is it illegal under state law for an employer to retaliate against an employee for calling
the state Health Department about an unsafe or unsanitary kitchen condition?
2. (Q.) What is a pretext? How did the pretext apply in this case?
(A.) Pretext is a reason given for an employer action that is not the true or real reasons for
the employer action. In the Adams case, the jury believed that the manager provoked
3. (Q.) Was Adams entitled to damages for emotional distress without supportive expert
medical testimony?
16.2, Haddle v. Garrison, p. 607
1. (Q.) Explain the Court of Appeals reasoning that Section 1985(2) did not provide a remedy
for Haddle.
(A.) Michael Haddle contended that Garrison and Kelly conspired to have him fired in
Chapter 16 Employment Relationships: Contractual and Tort Theories
Labor & Employment Law 137
2. (Q.) What is the flaw in the Court of Appeals reasoning that Section 1985(2) did not provide
a remedy for Haddle?
(A.) r the
3. (Q.) State the rule of the law.
(A.) Individuals who are victims of interference with at-will employment relationships, to
16.3, Semple v. Federal Express Corp., p. 608
1. (Q.) Did the policies and procedures set forth in the Employee Handbook provide legally
enforceable rights for the covered employees working under the handbook rules?
2.
to the employment at will doctrine? Is a retaliation firing for filing a general
harassment grievance against supervisors a protected public policy under state law?
16.4, Brown v. Lockheed Martin Corp., p. 614
1. (Q.) What happened to Brown professionally and medically after she initiated the internal
complaint that company vice president Owen had misused funds?
(A.)
Chapter 16 Employment Relationships: Contractual and Tort Theories
2. (Q.) Speculate on whether or not the Vice President of Human Resources had adequate
organizational standing to protect Ms. Brown from employer retaliation.
(A.) The answer appears to be no. An HR vice president is often called on to be the
3. (Q.) Does reinstatement and $75,000 in back pay make Andrea Brown whole for the illegal
activity of Lockheed?
(A.) Clearly not. Her career of Lockheed is in ruin and her health is adversely affected.
16.5, NIKE, Inc. v. McCarthy, p. 618
1. (Q.) Review the wording of the noncompete agreement as to duration and territory. Is it
unreasonably restrictive on McCarthy?
(A.) The one year duration is a reasonable period of time and not unduly restrictive on
2. (Q.)
(A.) The court held that Nike has a legitimate interest in enforcing the agreement, because
er Garden, Inc., p. 620
1. (Q.)
(A.)
2. (Q.) Is not the fact that Ferry, just prior to the accident, had gone to a pawn shop compelling
evidence he was using his van exclusively for his independent purposes and was not
Chapter 16 Employment Relationships: Contractual and Tort Theories
Labor & Employment Law 139
(A.) he was returning
3. (Q.) Give your opinion on the ethics of businesses converting employees to independent
contractors to reduce or eliminate costs, such as health and retirement benefits,
vacations, overtime, and maintenance and proper insurance of motor vehicles.
(A.) It is often necessary for employers to use independent contractors to do work for them
when employers do not have qualified or sufficient employees or the proper machinery
16.7, Bryant v. Livigni, p. 626
1. (Q.) Was there respondeat superior liability in this case?
2. (Q.) –
And if so, did it act negligently in retaining him as an employee?
(A.) n empty milk
case at a fellow employee some seven years before the incident involving the battery of
Chapter 16 Employment Relationships: Contractual and Tort Theories
Labor & Employment Law 140
:
Students can be asked what procedures management should follow in finding out
and determining which employees are no longer fit to continue in service. Most of the
3. (Q.) Livigni case hurt the employment prospects of
individuals with criminal records involving violence?
(A.) The answer is yes. Employers may be very reluctant to hire or retain employees with
Chapter Questions and Problems, p. 628
1. (Q.) List the four types of exception to the classic employment at will rule.
(A.) The court decisions that have carved out exceptions to the employment at will doctrine
may be classified as follows:
2. [Employment at will, Section 16.1.] According to the Duldulao decision, a contract exists
because (a) the language of the four-step disciplinary process was clear enough for an
employee to reasonably believe an offer had been made, (b) the handbook was disseminated
and her continued work, consideration for the promise.
If company policies are not worth the paper they are printed on, then perhaps it is best
Chapter 16 Employment Relationships: Contractual and Tort Theories
Labor & Employment Law 141
3. [Employment at will, Section 16.1.] awarded her
$1,981 in compensatory damages and $50,000 in punitive damages. The trial judge set aside
the punitive damages award, and Gates appealed to the Supreme Court of Montana. The
jury relied on the fact that the company had never issued Gates a warning about the quality
4. [Public policy exception to employment at will doctrine, Section 16.1.] Judgment for Hauck.
Employment for an indefinite term may be terminated at will and without cause. Public
policy, as expressed in the criminal laws of the state and the United States, requires a
narrow exception to this employment-at-will doctrine whereby an employer cannot
discharge an employee for refusal to perform an illegal act.
5. r intentional torts, Section 16.4; negligent hiring, Section 16.6.] The
at-tack by Trujillo on Medina was not within the scope of employment, nor did it further the
business of the employer, Cowboys. The respondeat superior claim was thus rejected.
6. [Respondeat superior; course of employment, Section 16.4.] Judgment for Yellow Cab Company.
The employee, Ball, did not act within the course of his employment when he got out of his
You may compare the situation in this case to that of a bartender or bouncer who beats
up an individual at the place of employment. The nature of these jobs makes the use of force
Chapter 16 Employment Relationships: Contractual and Tort Theories
Labor & Employment Law 142
7. [Vicarious liability; course of employment, Section 16.4.] Judgment for Ramos. Padilla believed
8. [Effect of terms set forth in employee handbooks, Section 16.1.] Judgment for H-P. The court held
9. [Employment at will; public policy exception, Section 16.1.] BFI is not correct. Judgment for
Paolella. His participation did not preclude reliance on the public policy exception. The
-than-licit