Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Share your feedback on this Case Brief

Thank You For Submiting Feedback!

  • Law School Case Brief

Howard v. Wolff Broad. Corp. - 611 So. 2d 307 (Ala. 1992)

Rule:

It has long been the law in Alabama that employment is terminable at will by either party for any reason unless there is an express and specific contract for lifetime employment or employment for a specific duration. Absent an agreement on a definite term, any employment is considered to be at-will, and may be terminated by either party, with or without cause or justification. Furthermore, employees in Alabama bear a heavy burden of proof to establish that an employment relationship is other than at-will. The law considers lifetime or permanent employment contracts to be extraordinary and not lightly to be implied.

Facts:

Appellant employee was fired by appellee employer solely because she was female. The employee filed an action alleging breach of contract and fraud. The employee claimed that her employment contract was not terminable at will because there was an implied covenant that the employer would not discriminate against her on the basis of race, gender, religion, or national origin, based upon the FCC regulations codified at 47 C.F.R. § 73.2080. The employee further argued that the employer through a sign posted in the station lobby, expressly represented to the employee when hiring her that she would not be discriminated against on the basis of sex. She alleged that the representation was false and was known to be false when it was made. The circuit court granted summary judgment in favor of the employer. The employee appealed. 

Issue:

Should the court carve out an exception to the employee-at-will doctrine and hold that plaintiff stated a cause of action for breach of an implied contract of employment, and for fraud? 

Answer:

No.

Conclusion:

The court affirmed the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the employer, finding that the provisions of 47 C.F.R. § 73.2080 did not become a binding promise once they were accepted by the employee through her continuing to work and did not transform her at-will employment relationship with into a permanent one. Anent the fraud claim, the court held that the employee produced no substantial evidence that the employer made the alleged representation with a present intent to deceive the employee or with any intent not to perform the obligation at the time the alleged representation was made.

Access the full text case

Essential Class Preparation Skills

  • How to Answer Your Professor's Questions
  • How to Brief a Case
  • Don't Miss Important Points of Law with BARBRI Outlines (Login Required)

Essential Class Resources

  • CivPro
  • Contracts
  • Constitutional Law
  • Corporations /Business Organizations
  • Criminal Law
  • Criminal Procedure/Investigation
  • Evidence
  • Legal Ethics/Professional Responsibility
  • Property
  • Secured Transactions
  • Torts
  • Trusts & Estates