 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Anderson v. South Lincoln Special Cemetery District1/29/1999
Appeal from the District Court of Lincoln County The Honorable John D. Troughton, Judge
* Chief Justice at time of oral argument; retired 11/2/98.
When his contract for employment as superintendent of the South Lincoln Special Cemetery District was not renewed, appellant, Leon E. Anderson (Anderson), brought this action against appellees, the South Lincoln Special Cemetery District by and through the Board of Trustees (the Board) and individual Board member Marta Gunter (Gunter). In a multi-count complaint, Anderson claimed wrongful termination; breach of the covenants of good faith and fair dealing; denial of procedural and substantive due process; and tortious interference with his employment contract by Gunter. Summary judgment in favor of appellees disposed of all claims. We affirm.
I. ISSUES
Anderson submits the following statements for review:
I. Did the district court err when it ruled as a matter of law that the appellant was an employee at will?
II. Did the district court properly address plaintiff = s assertion that the written agreement of February, 1994, was supported by consideration?
III. Did the district court err when it ruled as a matter of law that the appellee District did not breach the covenants of good faith and fair dealing when it terminated the appellant?
A. Were there questions of material fact regarding the existence of a special relationship between the appellant and appellee District?
B. Were there questions of material fact regarding the bad faith motives of the appellees in terminating the appellant?
IV. Did the district court err when it ruled as a matter of law that appellee Gunter enjoys immunity from liability for tortiously interfering with the appellant's employment contract?
V. Did the district court err when it ruled as a matter of law that appellant had no property interest in his employment? The Board responds:
I. Did the district court err when it ruled as a matter of law that the appellant was an employee at will?
II. Did appellee District according to Mariano & Associates, P. C. v. Board of County Commissioners of Sublette County, 737 P. 2d 323 (WYO. 1987) have the right to terminate the revocable oral employment contract and/or not renew the written agreement of February, 1994?
III. Did the district court properly address appellant = s assertion that the written agreement of February, 1994, was wholly unsupported by consideration?
IV. Did the district court err when it ruled as a matter of law that the appellee District did not breach the covenants of good faith and fair dealing when it terminated the appellant?
A. Are there questions of material fact regarding the existence of a special relationship between the appellant and appellee District?
B. Are there questions of material fact regarding alleged bad faith motives of appellee District in terminating the appellant?
C. Are there questions of material fact regarding alleged bad faith motives of appellee Gunter in terminating the appellant?
D. Does appellant need to establish a question of material fact that the termination occurred as a means to avoid payment of benefits already earned under the contract of employment to prevail on the tort theory?
V. Did the district court err when it ruled as a matter of law that appellee Gunter enjoys immunity from liability for tortiously interfering with the appellant's employment contract?
VI. Did the district court err when it ruled as a matter of law that appellant had no prop
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Wyoming Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|