Molder v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.
| Decision Date | 29 December 1983 |
| Docket Number | No. 01-83-0374-CV,01-83-0374-CV |
| Citation | 665 S.W.2d 175 |
| Parties | 115 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2409, 100 Lab.Cas. P 55,450 Dudley Gene MOLDER, Appellant, v. SOUTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY, Appellee. (1st Dist.) |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Robert W. Richard, William N. Wheat, Houston, for appellant.
Richard D. Billeaud, Christopher A. Knepp, Edward L. Kemble, Houston, for appellee.
Before DOYLE, WARREN and LEVY, JJ.
This is an appeal from a summary judgment denying the appellant's cause of action for breach of a contract. The appellant sought to enforce an alleged oral contract by which he claims that the appellee agreed to employ him permanently until he reached age 65.
The appellant began working for the appellee on January 5, 1950, at the age of eighteen. According to his testimony, he was frequently assured by his supervisors that as long as he performed his duties in a satisfactory manner, he would be employed by the appellee. The appellant, relying on these representations, and his periodic promotions with the management, worked for the appellee approximately 28 years. In 1978, the appellee terminated the appellant. In 1980, the appellant filed suit, alleging breach of an employment contract, wrongful discharge, fraud and misrepresentation. The court granted the appellee's motion for summary judgment and dismissed the appellant's suit. The appellant raises six points of error on appeal.
In the appellant's points of error one through three, he contends that the trial court erred in holding as a matter of law, that no contract of employment existed between the appellant and the appellee; that the appellant had no right to maintain the action for breach of contract and that the appellant should not be allowed to present evidence which might have established the existence of an implied contract. Neither the petition nor the affidavit of the appellant offered proof of a written contract. Furthermore, it has been held that unsigned employee benefit booklets, similar to those relied upon by the appellant, are insufficient memoranda of a contract of employment to satisfy the statute of frauds. Hurt v. Standard Oil Co. of Texas, 444 S.W.2d 342 (Tex.Civ.App.--El Paso 1969, no writ).
In Hurt, the court emphasized that none of the written material contained statements as to the type of work to be performed, or the wages to be paid. Id. at 346. The court held that the employee benefit booklets were not directed towards contractually binding the employees, but were designed to retain the employees by their interest in the profits and benefits. Id. Additionally, the material contained references to the effect of the employee's dismissal, retirement or resignations, on the amount or receipt of certain benefits. The court held that these references indicated that the employment of the appellant was terminable at will.
In the case before us, the booklets submitted by the appellant were almost identical to those found in Hurt, generally outlining and explaining the effects of the appellant's voluntary resignation or retirement, and clearly implying a "terminable at will" arrangement. Thus, the appellant submitted no tangible summary judgment proof that a written contract existed in his motion to deny summary judgment.
The court was correct in impliedly holding that any oral contract that existed would necessarily fall within the Texas Statute of Frauds, Tex.Bus. & Comm.Code Ann. § 26.01 (1967) and would be unenforceable. Hurt, supra.
The appellant argues that he was contractually entitled to work for the appellee until retirement at age 65. When the appellant allegedly received these oral representations, he was eighteen years old. A contract of employment until retirement at age 65 could not have possibly been fulfilled within one year from the date of its making. These three points of error are overruled.
In the last three points of error, the appellant contends that the court erred in automatically applying the "at will" rule of employment, instead of considering the appellant's claims of fraud and tortious wrongful discharge. The appellant cites several cases from other jurisdictions in which the courts carved exceptions to the "at will" rule. See Texas and New Orleans R.R. Co. v. Brotherhood of Railway and S.S. Clerks, 281 U.S. 548, 50 S.Ct. 427, 74 L.Ed. 1034 (1930) (). Milton v. Illinois Bell Telephone Co., 101 Ill.App.3d 75, 56 Ill.Dec. 497, 427 N.E.2d 829 (1981); Petermann v. International...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bullock v. Automobile Club of Michigan
...that they be in writing where it is clear that performance beyond a year is contemplated. See, for example, Molder v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co., 665 S.W.2d 175 (Tex.App., 1983); Evans v. Fluor Distribution Co., 799 F.2d 364 (CA 7, 1986); Hodge v. Evans Financial, 262 U.S.App.D.C. 151,......
-
American Centennial Ins. Co. v. Canal Ins. Co.
...[1st Dist.] 1985), rev'd in part, aff'd in part, 727 S.W.2d 503 (Tex.1987). In Molder v. Southwestern Bell Tel. Co., 665 S.W.2d 175, 177 (Tex.App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1983, writ ref'd n.r.e.), this Court declined to deviate from the "at-will" employment termination rule and "recognize[d] t......
-
Pruitt v. Levi Strauss & Co.
...Instruments, Inc., 750 S.W.2d 843, 846 (Tex.App.--Houston [14th Dist.] 1988, no writ); Molder v. Southwestern Bell Tel. Co., 665 S.W.2d 175, 177 (Tex.App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1983, writ ref'd n.r.e.). Likewise, an agreement to provide lifetime or permanent employment must be in writing to ......
-
Young v. Ward
...could not reasonably be completed within one year from the date the cases were taken); Molder v. Southwestern Bell Tel. Co., 665 S.W.2d 175, 177 (Tex.App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1983, writ ref'd n.r.e.) (employment contract until retirement for eighteen year-old employee within Agreements whi......
-
Wrongful Discharge
...until age 65 made to 57-year-old employee because contract is not capable of performance within one year); Molder v. Sw. Bell Tel. Co., 665 S.W.2d 175, 177 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1983, writ ref’d (holding unenforceable oral promise to employ 18-yearold plaintiff until age 65). C. Ap......
-
Wrongful discharge
...until age 65 made to 57-year-old employee because contract is not capable of performance within one year); Molder v. Sw. Bell Tel. Co. , 665 S.W.2d 175, 177 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1983, writ ref’d n.r.e.) (holding unenforceable oral promise to employ 18-year-old plaintiff until age ......
-
Wrongful Discharge
...until age 65 made to 57-year-old employee because contract is not capable of performance within one year); Molder v. Sw. Bell Tel. Co. , 665 S.W.2d 175, 177 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1983, writ ref’d n.r.e.) (holding unenforceable oral promise to employ 18-year-old plaintiff until age ......
-
Table of cases
...Consolidated Communications Center, et al ., 536 F.3d 640 (7th Cir. 2008), §§1:8.C.1, 25:B.1.c Molder v. Southwestern Bell Tel. Co. , 665 S.W.2d 175 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1983, writ ref’d n.r.e.), §3:4.B Molerio v. FBI , 749 F.2d 815 (D.C. Cir. 1984), §24:4.E.2 Molnar v. Ebasco Con......