Appellant former employee sought review of the judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County (California), which rendered judgment in favor of appellee former employer in his wrongful termination suit.
Nakase Law Firm litigates workplace harassment
Appellant former employee sought review of the judgment rendered in favor of appellee former employer in a wrongful termination suit. Appellant contended that appellee’s filing of a proof of loss statement with the bonding company falsely accused him of committing a crime and constituted libel on its face. Appellee responded that the communication was absolutely privileged. The court determined the communication was not absolutely privileged and that appellee should have argued qualified privilege. The court concluded there were triable issues of material fact regarding appellee’s proof of loss statement. Appellant asserted that he was discharged without just cause and without the authority of appellee’s board of directors after he had completed the 90-day probationary period. The court applied the statute of frauds because it would be easier to strike from any judgment appellant might recover the amount based on the oral contract. The court concluded there were triable issues of material fact regarding appellant’s dismissal. The court reversed the judgment of the trial court.
The court reversed the judgment of the trial court, because triable issues of material fact remained regarding appellee former employer’s proof of loss statement and appellant former employer’s dismissal.