Buchanan v. Ameristar Casino Vicksburg, Inc.
| Docket Number: | 2002-CA-00529-SCT | |
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 08-07-2003 Opinion Author: Graves, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Wrongful discharge - Employment at will Judge(s) Concurring: Pittman, C.J., Smith, P.J., Waller, Cobb and Carlson, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz, J. Dissenting Author : McRae, P.J. Dissent Joined By : Easley, J. Procedural History: Summary Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - TORTS-OTHER THAN PERSONAL INJURY & PROPERTY DAMAGE |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 03-05-2002 Appealed from: Warren County Circuit Court Judge: Isadore Patrick Disposition: Circuit Court granted summary judgment in favor of Ameristar Casino Case Number: 99-0343-CI(P) |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Katherine L. Buchanan |
DAVID M. SESSUMS |
||
| Appellee: | Ameristar Casino Vicksburg, Inc. | HERBERT C. EHRHARDT BRANDON MICHAEL CORDELL |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Wrongful discharge - Employment at will |
| Summary of the Facts: | While employed with Ameristar, Katherine Buchanan was injured on the job and received workers’ compensation benefits. When Buchanan was terminated by Ameristar, she filed an action against Ameristar alleging wrongful discharge. Ameristar filed a motion for summary judgment which the court granted. Buchanan appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Buchanan argues that the court erred in granting summary judgment, because there was a genuine issue of material fact about whether she was improperly terminated for filing a workers’ compensation claim. Mississippi is an employment at-will state. The general rule of employment at will is that a contract for employment for an indefinite period may be terminated at the will of either party, whether the termination is for any reason or no reason at all, with the exceptions that an employee who refuses to participate in an illegal act shall not be barred from bringing an action in tort for damages against his employer and an employee who is discharged for reporting illegal acts of his employer to the employer or anyone else is not barred from bringing action in tort for damages against his employer. Because Buchanan’s termination does not meet the requirements of the exceptions, she is precluded by the employment at will doctrine from bringing an action for retaliatory discharge. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
