 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Phillips v. City of Dayton2/29/2000
Appellant Carol Phillips challenges the district court's grant of summary judgment dismissing her age discrimination, disability discrimination, retaliatory discharge, and breach of contract claims. The district court granted summary judgment on all claims based solely on its determination that appellant had resigned from her job. Because this presents a genuine issue of fact that is material to a claim of age discrimination or retaliatory discharge, the district court erred in granting summary judgment on these claims.
Because it is unclear whether the city made any quasi-judicial determination, we remand on appellant's breach of contract claim for further consideration. Because appellant failed to establish a prima facie case of disability discrimination, we affirm the district court's dismissal of that claim.
DECISION
On appeal from summary judgment, we must determine whether there are any genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court erred in its application of the law. Cummings v. Koehnen, 568 N.W.2d 418, 420 (Minn. 1997). In reviewing a grant of summary judgment, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party; if a party fails to establish a prima facie element of a claim, however, summary judgment is appropriate. DLH, Inc. v. Russ, 566 N.W.2d 60, 69 (Minn. 1997).
Age Discrimination and Retaliatory Discharge
Appellant contends that the district court erred in determining that she resigned. To establish a prima facie case of age discrimination or retaliatory discharge, a plaintiff must prove that she was discharged. See Benson v. Northwest Airlines, Inc., 561 N.W.2d 530, 539 (Minn. App. 1997), review denied (Minn. Jun. 11, 1997); Ward v. Employee Dev. Corp., 516 N.W.2d 198, 201 (Minn. App. 1994), review denied (Minn. July 8, 1994). Whether an employee quit or was discharged is generally a question of fact. Goodwin v. BPS Guard Servs., Inc., 524 N.W.2d 28, 29 (Minn. App. 1984).
In this case, there is no direct evidence that appellant resigned. The record contains letters from city staff to respondent informing her that her paid medical leave would expire November 3, 1997, that her failure to respond would be considered a resignation, and that her resignation would be processed effective November 3, 1997. The record also contains a letter from appellant's attorney, dated November 4, 1997, stating that appellant had no intention of resigning. The record is silent as to whether the city council approved the actions of city staff or whether the city council took any other action in this matter. Because there are competing inferences from these facts on whether appellant quit or was discharged, the district court erred in dismissing appellant's age discrimination and retaliatory discharge claims.
Breach of Contract
Judicial review of an administrative body's termination decision must be invoked by writ of certiorari. Dietz v. Dodge County, 487 N.W.2d 237, 239 (Minn. 1992). A municipality's decision to discharge a public employee is quasi-judicial, requiring review by writ of certiorari, even though the public employee may attempt to bring a breach of contract action in district court against the municipality. See Willis v. County of Sherburne, 555 N.W.2d 277, 282 (Minn. 1996); Mowry v. Young, 565 N.W.2d 717, 719 (Minn. App. 1997), review denied (Minn. Sept. 18, 1997).
Appellant argues that the district court had jurisdiction to hear this breach of contract claim because the city council never made any quasi-judicial decision to discharge her. Respondent claims the record supports the existence of a quasi-judicial decision from which to invoke a w
Page 1 2 3 Minnesota Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|