 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Schuster v. Derocili6/15/2001
Submitted: March 13, 2001
Upon appeal from the Superior Court. REVERSED in part, AFFIRMED, in part and REMANDED.
Linda T. Schuster, a former employee-at-will of Compliance Environmental Incorporated, appeals the Superior Court's grant of summary judgment to Compliance and its president, Valentino P. Derocili. Schuster argues that the Superior Court erred when it found that termination of her at-will employment based upon her refusal to submit to her employer's alleged sexual advances did not constitute a valid cause of action for breach of contract. Schuster also argues that Derocili slandered her when, during a meeting attended by Derocili, Schuster and Schuster's supervisor, Derocili stated that he terminated Schuster's employment because her work performance was substandard.
We find that the Superior Court erred when it found that Schuster's complaint did not allege a valid cause of action that Derocili had breached an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing contained in her at-will contract of employment. We further find that the Superior Court correctly dismissed Schuster's slander claim. Therefore, we REVERSE in part, AFFIRM in part and REMAND this case to the Superior Court for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
I.
On September 2, 1997, Schuster began working temporarily as an administrative assistant for Compliance. On October 13, 1997, Schuster began working full-time for Compliance under a written employment agreement, which could be terminated by either party giving thirty days written notice. Schuster worked primarily for Derocili, the president and controlling shareholder of Compliance.
Schuster contends that Derocili began making sexual comments and innuendoes towards her several weeks after she began to work at Compliance. Schuster contends that Derocili began touching her inappropriately by hugging her, putting his hands on her chest and/or legs, putting his fingers between her cleavage and attempting to kiss her on the lips. Schuster contends that despite informing Derocili that his conduct made her uncomfortable, he continued to make advances towards her. Schuster complained to two co-workers about Derocili, and after consulting her pastor, she began recording Derocili's conduct in a journal and rejecting Derocili's advances more forcefully. Derocili admitted that there was touching between him and Schuster but contends that Schuster "mischaracterizes" the contact.
In December 1998, Derocili fired Schuster in a face-to-face meeting attended by Brian Goff, Schuster's supervisor. At the meeting, Derocili handed Schuster a termination memorandum that stated Schuster's termination resulted from substandard job performance. Believing that the statements in the memorandum were false and that Derocili actually terminated her merely for refusing his sexual advances, Schuster refused to sign the memorandum. Schuster also contends that during the meeting, Derocili made slanderous remarks about her. Goff testified at a deposition that Schuster's work was "unsatisfactory in all respects." Schuster's termination, however, came only seven days after she had received a $500 performance-based bonus. Schuster had also completed a ninety day probationary period, received several pay raises and another performance-based bonus during that time.
On February 4, 1999, Schuster filed this suit in the Superior Court. On March 8, 1999, Schuster filed a complaint with the Delaware Department of Labor. The Department of Labor determined that Schuster failed to substantiate her allegation that Derocili sexually harassed her and dismissed her complaint on October 29, 1999. On June 15, 2000, the Superior
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Delaware Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|