Straynar v. Jack W. Harris Co., 57929
| Decision Date | 28 June 1979 |
| Docket Number | No. 57929,57929 |
| Parties | STRAYNAR v. JACK W. HARRIS COMPANY et al. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Bruce D. Duncan, Doraville, for appellant.
Parker, Johnson & Cook, Kirk W. Watkins, G. William Long, III, Terrill A. Parker, Atlanta, for appellees.
This is a tort action based on allegations that appellees-defendants unlawfully and maliciously interfered with the employment contract between plaintiff-appellant and defendants; that defendants maliciously terminated plaintiff from her employment and breached her contract with defendants; and that defendants wrongfully discharged plaintiff in retaliation for her refusal to succumb to sexual advances and have a sexual affair with co-defendant John W. Harris. The other defendant was Jack W. Harris Company, a corporation. The case came on for trial before a jury. The plaintiff's case consisted of her testimony and certain documentary evidence. After plaintiff rested, defendant moved for a directed verdict, and it was granted and a judgment for defendant was entered. On appeal, plaintiff enumerates as error the grant of the directed verdict.
The plaintiff was the only witness called in support of her case. She testified that she entered into a written contract on July 1, 1976, with the corporate defendant whereby plaintiff was appointed as sales representative for the corporation. Plaintiff established by her testimony that co-defendant John W. Harris was president of the defendant corporation and that prior to this written contract, she had been employed by defendant John Harris pursuant to an oral agreement from January, 1974 to July 1, 1976. During the latter period of time plaintiff testified that co-defendant John W. Harris had asked that she have a sexual affair with him which she refused. In July, 1976, after the execution of the written contract, plaintiff stated that ". . . (defendant John W. Harris) wanted me to be his mistress, and it was put to me that I had to give something in return in order to stay . . ." and plaintiff refused. On August 23, 1976, according to plaintiff, she was called into the office of Harris and she was informed that she was "fired" and Harris gave as the reason: According to plaintiff's testimony, Harris told her that he had to confer with the other two members of the board of directors "that he had made the decision and that he would need to check with them as stockholders to make sure that everything was according to the contract"; and Plaintiff also testified in response to a question as to whether Harris had the authority to terminate her: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Shapoff v. Scull
...(1989 Tex.) 767 S.W.2d 686, 690; Giblin v. Murphy (3 Dept.1983) 97 A.D.2d 668, 469 N.Y.S.2d 211, 214-215; Straynar v. Jack W. Harris Co. (1979) 150 Ga.App. 509, 258 S.E.2d 248, 249-250.) Those cases are not persuasive. They do not discuss either the substantive burdens a defendant must meet......
-
Troy v. Interfinancial, Inc.
...132 Ga.App. 569, 570(1) 208 S.E.2d 583; Andress v. Augusta Nursing Facilities, 156 Ga.App. 775, 275 S.E.2d 368; Straynar v. Jack W. Harris Co., 150 Ga.App. 509, 258 S.E.2d 248, and cases cited therein. Consequently, the Supreme Court in the Busbin case has created case law that in the absen......
- Curtis v. State, 57664
-
Interference With Business Relations
.... 767 S.W.2d 686, 690 (Tex. 1989); Giblin v. Murphy , 97 A.D.2d 668 (1983) (469 N.Y.S.2d 211, 214-215); Straynar v. Jack W. Harris Co ., 150 Ga.App. 509 (1979) (258 S.E.2d 248, 249-250).) In contrast, some courts have held that a corporate owner may nevertheless be liable for interfering wi......
-
Interference With Business Relations
.... 767 S.W.2d 686, 690 (Tex. 1989); Giblin v. Murphy , 97 A.D.2d 668 (1983) (469 N.Y.S.2d 211, 214-215); Straynar v. Jack W. Harris Co ., 150 Ga.App. 509 (1979) (258 S.E.2d 248, 249-250).) In contrast, some courts have held that a corporate owner may nevertheless be liable for interfering wi......
-
Interference with Business Relations
.... 767 S.W.2d 686, 690 (Tex. 1989); Giblin v. Murphy , 97 A.D.2d 668 (1983) (469 N.Y.S.2d 211, 214-215); Straynar v. Jack W. Harris Co ., 150 Ga.App. 509 (1979) (258 S.E.2d 248, 249-250).) In contrast, some courts have held that a corporate owner may nevertheless be liable for interfering wi......