Streckfus v. Gardenside Terrace Co-op., Inc., 1-185
| Citation | 481 N.E.2d 423 |
| Case Date | August 15, 1985 |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Indiana |
Page 423
v.
GARDENSIDE TERRACE COOPERATIVE, INC., and Triangle
Associates, Inc., Appellees (Defendants Below).
First District.
Page 424
William C. Moyer, Steven A. Gustafson, Lorch Moyer Gesenhues & Bitzegaio, New Albany, for appellant.
Sandra L. Heeke, Fox & Smith, Jeffersonville, for appellees.
ROBERTSON, Judge.
Plaintiff-appellant Dixie Streckfus (Streckfus) appeals from a summary judgment entered in favor of defendants-appellees Gardenside Terrace Cooperative, Inc. (Gardenside) and Triangle Associates, Inc. (Triangle).
We affirm.
Streckfus was hired by Triangle for employment with Gardenside as the resident manager of certain real estate. The terms of Streckfus' employment were contained in a written agreement. The agreement did not promise employment for a definite period of time, but included provisions in the event of resignation or termination:
I [Streckfus] understand that the apartment or townhouse provided for me ... must be vacated within 10 days in the event of my resignation or termination of my employment....
At the time of my termination or resignation, I understand that ... I must ... provide a forwarding address and mutually agree with Triangle Associates, Inc. on any amounts due me by Gardenside Terrace and/or for any amounts due Gardenside Terrace by myself.
I also acknowledge receipt of $150.00 to be used by me as a Petty Cash Fund and returned and accounted for in its entirety upon my resignation or termination from my employment.
The agreement stated that Triangle had sole control over Streckfus' employment pursuant to a management contract between Triangle and Gardenside. The management contract contained the following language:
If the resident manager and/or maintenance superintendent should have to be discharged for cause, the agent will suspend said employee without pay, notify the board of directors of such suspension, and request that the board approve discharge of that employee within 48 hours of such notice.
A second paragraph, incorporated by reference into the management contract, provided:
The dismissal or termination of the maintenance superintendent or resident manager shall be done with the prior approval of the board of directors in most cases. Sufficient reason for termination must be supplied to the board for the review and decision.
On October 13, 1981, Streckfus was fired. Streckfus sued for breach of the employment agreement, contending that she was fired without just cause. Gardenside and Triangle moved for summary judgment on the ground that Streckfus was an employee at will. The trial court entered summary judgment in favor of Gardenside and Triangle.
On appeal, Streckfus raises numerous allegations of error which may be consolidated and restated as follows: Whether the trial court erroneously granted summary judgment on the theory that Streckfus was an employee at will. In reviewing the grant of a summary judgment motion, the court of appeals employs the same...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Shannon v. Bepko, IP 87-327-C.
...for a fixed duration or consideration given by the employee in addition to her services." Streckfus v. Gardenside Terrace Co-Op, 481 N.E.2d 423 (Ind.Ct.App. 1985), vacated on other grounds, 504 N.E. 2d 273 (Ind.1987). See also, Tri-City Comprehensive Community v. Franklin, 498 N.E.2d 1303, ......
-
Speckman v. City of Indianapolis, 49A04-8605-CV-155
...or consideration given by the employee in addition to his services. Streckfus v. Gardenside Terrace Co-Op, Inc. (1985), Ind.App., 481 N.E.2d 423; Hamblen v. Danners, Inc. (1985), Ind.App., 478 N.E.2d 926; Ryan v. J.C. Penney & Co. (7th Cir.1980) 627 F.2d 836; McQueeney v. Glenn (1980), Ind.......
-
Romack v. Public Service Co. of Indiana, Inc., 4-985
...results in a detriment to him and a corresponding benefit to the employer. Streckfus v. Gardenside Terrace Co-op, Inc. (1985), Ind.App., 481 N.E.2d 423, 425; Page 773 Hamblen, supra at 928; Ohio Table Pad Co. of Indiana, Inc. v. Hogan (1981), Ind.App., 424 N.E.2d 144. Therefore, in order to......
-
Reynolds v. State, 53A01-9008-CR-331
...the State should use caution when utilizing such evidence, to mean that the Patterson rule was extended to its limit in Peckinpaugh. 481 N.E.2d at 423. We agree with James and will refrain from extending the Patterson rule beyond its limit as defined by our supreme court in Criminal Reckles......