Alford v. Life Savers, Inc.
| Decision Date | 22 January 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 44439,44439 |
| Citation | 210 Neb. 441,315 N.W.2d 260 |
| Parties | , 115 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 4066 Charles ALFORD, Appellant, v. LIFE SAVERS, INC., Appellee. |
| Court | Nebraska Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court
1. Employment Contracts: Termination of Employment. When the employment is not for a definite term, and there are no contractual or statutory restrictions upon the right of discharge, an employer may lawfully discharge an employee whenever and for whatever cause he chooses, without incurring liability.
Souchek & Kimble, Seward, for appellant.
Blevens, Blevens & Jacobs, Seward, for appellee.
Submitted without oral argument.
Before KRIVOSHA, C.J., and BOSLAUGH, McCOWN, CLINTON, BRODKEY, WHITE, and HASTINGS, JJ.
The plaintiff appeals from an order dismissing the amended petition after a demurrer to the amended petition had been sustained.
The amended petition alleged that the plaintiff had been employed by the defendant as a salesman. On February 2, 1978, the plaintiff's employment was terminated by his supervisor, an employee of the defendant, allegedly without notice and without cause. The amended petition further alleged that the defendant was negligent in failing to exercise proper supervision and control over the plaintiff's supervisor; in failing to ascertain whether the reasons given for the termination of the plaintiff's employment were truthful; in failing to ascertain whether the termination of the plaintiff's employment violated company policy; in failing to ascertain whether a valid reason existed for termination of the plaintiff's employment; and in failing to ascertain whether the plaintiff's supervisor properly carried out his duty as supervisor. The plaintiff prayed for damages in the amount of $31,815.
There is no allegation in the petition that the plaintiff had any right of continued employment. When the employment is not for a definite term, and there are no contractual or statutory restrictions upon the right of discharge, an employer may lawfully discharge an employee whenever and for whatever cause he chooses, without incurring liability. Mau v. Omaha Nat. Bank, 207 Neb. 308, 299 N.W.2d 147 (1980). See, also, Stewart v. North Side Produce Co., 197 Neb. 245, 248 N.W.2d 37 (1976).
The amended petition failed to state a cause of action and was subject to demurrer. The judgment dismissing the amended petition is affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Beam v. Concord Hospitality, Inc.
...Supreme Court, when faced with the choice, declined to recognize negligent supervision as a common law tort. See Alford v. Life Savers, Inc., 210 Neb. 441, 315 N.W.2d 260 (1982). We also observe that this cause of action, once recognized, would necessarily arise any time a middle level supe......
-
Bagwell v. Peninsula Regional Medical Center
...Mont. 419, 720 P.2d 257 (1986), appeal dismissed, 479 U.S. 980, 107 S.Ct. 564, 93 L.Ed.2d 570 (1986) (adopting); Alford v. Life Savers Inc., 210 Neb. 441, 315 N.W.2d 260 (1982) (rejecting); Lambert, 843 P.2d at 1118-20 (rejecting); Wilder v. Cody Country Chamber of Commerce, 868 P.2d 211 (W......
-
Midwest Knitting Mills, Inc. v. US
...See, e.g., Chesapeake and Potomac Telephone Company of Virginia v. Dowdy, 235 Va. 55, 365 S.E.2d 751 (1988); Alford v. Life Savers, Inc., 210 Neb. 441, 315 N.W.2d 260 (1982). Recently, in concluding that such a cause of action does not exist in Kansas, the Tenth Circuit observed in an emplo......
-
Serafin v. City of Lexington, Neb.
...an employment contract for a fixed term. Kyles v. ENHSA, supra; Rose v. ENHSA, supra, 510 F.Supp. at 1356; Alford v. Life Savers, Inc., 210 Neb. 441, 442, 315 N.W.2d 260, 261 (1982). The Nebraska Supreme Court has recognized, however, that persons may have constitutionally protected propert......