White v. Chelsea Industries, Inc.
| Decision Date | 21 January 1983 |
| Citation | 425 So.2d 1090 |
| Parties | Reed WHITE v. CHELSEA INDUSTRIES, INC., et al. 81-660. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Bob E. Allen of Boggs & Allen, Clanton, for appellant.
Robert L. Thompson and Stanford G. Wilson of Elarbee, Clark & Paul, Atlanta, and Wade H. Morton, Jr., Columbiana, for appellees.
Plaintiff in this case claimed that his discharge was a breach of an implied employment contract. Following a grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants, plaintiff appeals. We affirm.
The only question presented to this court is whether summary judgment was properly granted in this case.
Plaintiff, Reed White, was a foreman at Elastic Corporation of America in Columbiana, Alabama, from August 1975 until his termination on or about March 25, 1981. Mr. White filed a complaint in the Circuit Court of Shelby County against defendants, Chelsea Industries, Inc.; Elastic Corporation of America, Chelsea's subsidiary doing business in Alabama; Edgar Gaskins, a supervisor employed by Elastic Corporation; and others. Plaintiff sought to be restored to his former employment and to recover lost wages and damages. The complaint alleged an implied employment contract based on an employee handbook distributed to plaintiff by the company. It further alleged this contract was breached when plaintiff was discharged without fair and sufficient cause. A motion for summary judgment supported by an affidavit was filed on behalf of the defendants. The motion was opposed by the plaintiff, but was granted by the trial court. This appeal followed.
Relying on the employee handbook, plaintiff alleges that an implied contract existed between himself and the company and that his employment was not terminable at will. A copy of the handbook was supplied to us with the record on appeal. After reviewing the handbook, we conclude that it does not create a binding employment agreement and that Mr. White's employment relationship with the company was terminable at the will of either party. Courts faced with claims similar to that in the instant case in which employees contended that a handbook rose to the level of a contract of employment support our conclusion and have held that the handbook does not vary the general common law rule that an employee is terminable at will. See e.g. Johnson v. National Beef Packing Co., 220 Kan. 52, 551 P.2d 779, 781 (1976); Chin v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co., 96 Misc.2d 1070, 410 N.Y.S.2d 737 (1978).
In the present case there is no agreement specifying a definite duration of employment services or limiting defendants' legal right to terminate such employment; thus there exists an employment at will. This court in ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Barger v. General Elec. Co., Civ. A. No. 83-0167-L.
...following jurisdictions have held that an employee handbook does not generally vary on employment at-will: Alabama, White v. Chelsa Industries, 425 So.2d 1090 (Ala.1983); District of Columbia, Prouty v. National Railroad Passenger Corp., 572 F.Supp. 200 (D.D.C.1983) and Uriarte v. Perez-Mol......
-
Cook v. Heck's Inc.
...of time and no contractual or statutory limitations on the employer's right to terminate with or without cause. White v. Chelsea Industries, 425 So.2d 1090 (Ala.1983); Johnson v. National Beef Packing Co., 220 Kan. 52, 551 P.2d 779 (1976); Mau v. Omaha National Bank, 207 Neb. 308, 299 N.W.2......
-
Hoffman-La Roche, Inc. v. Campbell
...the employment relationship at will. The appellant argues that this Court has already addressed this question in White v. Chelsea Industries, Inc., 425 So.2d 1090 (Ala.1983). In that case, it was "Relying on the employee handbook, plaintiff alleges that an implied contract existed between h......
-
Bachelder v. Communications Satellite Corp., Civ. No. 84-0310 P.
...contractual obligations. (See, e.g., Uriarte v. Perez-Molina (D.D.C.1977), 434 F.Supp. 76 (applying D.C. law); White v. Chelsea Industries, Inc. (Ala.1983), 425 So.2d 1090; Heideck v. Kent General Hospital, Inc. (Del.1982), 446 A.2d 1095; Muller v. Stromberg Carlson Corp. (Fla. App.1983), 4......