Lavery v. Southlake Center for Mental Health, 64A03-9004-CV-172
Decision Date | 19 February 1991 |
Docket Number | No. 64A03-9004-CV-172,64A03-9004-CV-172 |
Citation | 566 N.E.2d 1055 |
Court | Indiana Appellate Court |
Parties | 124 Lab.Cas. P 57,241, 6 IER Cases 335 Mary C. LAVERY, Appellant (Plaintiff Below), v. SOUTHLAKE CENTER FOR MENTAL HEALTH, Joan Strong, Supervisor, Emergency Services, Marcia Fridrich, Director of Inpatient/Emergency Services, Lee C. Strawhun, President, Betty Jacobsma, Director of Inpatient & Emergency Services, Appellees (Defendants Below). |
Lynn Hammond, Highland, for appellant.
Robert J. Dignam, Spangler, Jennings & Dougherty, P.C., Thomas M. Greenberg, Walker, Fleming & Greenberg, Merrillville, for appellees.
Mary Lavery appeals a grant of summary judgment in favor of her former employer, Southlake Center for Mental Health. She presents a single issue for our review, which we restate as follows: did the trial court's characterization of Mary as an employee at will constitute an incorrect application of the law?
We affirm.
On May 13, 1985, Mary began her employment as a Crisis Intervention Specialist at Southlake. As a condition of her employment, Mary was required to reside within 30 minutes responsive time to the center, located in Merrillville, Indiana. In July, 1985, Mary moved from her parents' residence in LaPorte, Indiana (a commuting distance of 35 minutes from Merrillville) to Crown Point, Indiana.
Mary received an unsatisfactory work performance evaluation on April 12, 1987. She received written warnings on July 30, 1987 and on May 16, 1988. On May 31, 1988, Mary was terminated, after declining the option to tender her resignation.
On December 22, 1988, Mary filed suit alleging wrongful discharge. She acknowledged that an employer may terminate an employee at will with or without cause. However, she asserted that her move at Southlake's behest constituted independent consideration, converting her status to that of a permanent employee, terminable only for good cause.
Discovery was conducted, and on January 16, 1990, the court heard argument on Southlake's Motion for Summary Judgment. In granting Southlake's motion, the court stated:
In reviewing a grant of summary judgment, we must determine whether there exists a genuine issue of material fact and whether the trial court correctly applied the law. Doubts are to be resolved in favor of the non-movant. Jones v. Central National Bank of St. Johns (1989), Ind.App., 547 N.E.2d 887, 889.
An indefinite employment contract is terminable at the will of either party unless it is supported by independent consideration. Ohio Table Pad Co. of Indiana v. Hogan (1981), Ind.App., 424 N.E.2d 144, 145-46, trans. denied. Independent consideration converting employment at will to employment requiring good cause for termination is that which results in a detriment to the employee and a corresponding benefit to the employer. Hamblen v. Danners, Inc. (1985), Ind.App., 478 N.E.2d 926, 928.
In Hogan, supra, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Rist v. Lakeshore Dunes Apartments
...(Ind. App. 1999), vacated in part on other grounds upon rehearing, 711 N.E.2d 1288 (Ind. App. 1999); Lavery v. Southlake Center for Mental Health, 566 N.E.2d 1055, 1057 (Ind. App. 1991). However, an exception arises if the employee provided adequate independent consideration, such as leavin......
-
Kennedy v. McCarty
...employment contract of indefinite duration is presumptively terminable at the will of either party"); Lavery v. Southlake Center for Mental Health, 566 N.E.2d 1055, 1057 (Ind.Ct.App.1991) ("An indefinite employment contract is terminable at the will of either party unless it is supported by......
-
Eck & Associates, Inc. v. Alusuisse Flexible Packaging, Inc.
...case, we note that the determination of whether a party is employed at-will is a legal determination. Lavery v. Southlake Center for Mental Health, 566 N.E.2d 1055, 1056 (Ind.Ct.App.1991). Historically, Indiana has recognized two basic forms of employment: (1) employment for a definite or a......
-
Muncie Indus. Revolving Loan Fund Bd. v. Indiana Const. Corp., 27A02-9101-CV-19
...the trial court correctly applied the law, resolving any doubts in favor of the non-moving party. Lavery v. Southlake Center for Mental Health (1991) 3d Dist. Ind.App., 566 N.E.2d 1055. I. The court below granted summary judgment on the ground that the Board was estopped to assert its secur......