Misskelley v. Carroll County
| Docket Number: | 2009-CA-01054-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 10-05-2010 Opinion Author: Barnes, J. Holding: Affirmed. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Contract - Employment status - Breach - Termination of employment - Catastrophic leave clause Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Irving, Griffis, Ishee, Roberts and Carlton, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Maxwell, J. Procedural History: Summary Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - CONTRACT |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 05-28-2009 Appealed from: Carroll County Circuit Court Judge: Clarence E. Morgan, III Disposition: SUMMARY JUDGMENT GRANTED IN FAVOR OF THE APPELLEES Case Number: 2008-0038 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Cooper L. "Pete" Misskelley |
WEBB FRANKLIN |
|
|
| Appellee: | Carroll County, Mississippi and Carroll/Montgomery Regional Correctional Facility | SILAS W. MCCHAREN, SANDRA DENISE BUCHANAN | ||
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: | Contract - Employment status - Breach - Termination of employment - Catastrophic leave clause |
| Summary of the Facts: | Cooper “Pete” Misskelley is the former warden of the Carroll County/Montgomery County Correctional Facility. When Misskelley became physically disabled and unable to perform his duties as warden, he requested his accrued catastrophic leave, a benefit granted by language contained in the correctional facility’s personnel policy handbook. His accrued leave totaled 275 days. However, the Board of Supervisors of Carroll County approved only fifty-two days of catastrophic leave; the remaining 223 days were considered “creditable service” to his retirement plan since the Board considered Misskelly terminated from employment as of December 31, 2007. Misskelley filed a complaint against Carroll County and the Carroll County/Montgomery County Regional Correctional Facility, claiming that he should have received the remaining 223 days of accrued leave. Carroll County filed a motion to dismiss and/or, alternatively, a motion for summary judgment. The court granted the motion, and Misskelly appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Employment status Misskelley argues that the resolution of the issue of his employment status was outcome determinative and should have been addressed by the circuit court. Admittedly, there is a dispute of fact as to whether Misskelley resigned in April 2007; however, it is not a material issue pertinent to Misskelley’s actual substantive claim. The question of whether Misskelley had actually resigned in April 2007, making him an at-will employee, or whether he retained his status as a contract employee, was not relevant to the issue of whether he was entitled to payment for his accrued catastrophic leave. The handbook was applicable to all employees of the correctional facility, whether their status was contractual or at-will. Issue 2: Breach of contract Misskelley argues that Carroll County’s failure to keep him in catastrophic-leave status and compensate him for the accrued 223 days constituted a breach of his employment contract as the personnel handbook was a part of his employment contract. An employee policy manual can create contractual obligations, even in the absence of a written agreement. Furthermore, a written contract can be modified by a policy handbook which then becomes part of the contract, but only where the contract expressly provides that it will be performed in accordance with the policies, rules and regulations of the employer. Misskelley argues, in effect, that once he was placed on catastrophic leave, he was guaranteed employment through his accrued 275 days. However, there is nothing in the handbook or Misskelley’s contract to support this claim. Misskelley’s employment contract makes no mention of the employee handbook and its policies. Therefore, although the handbook’s catastrophic leave policy was legally binding between the County and Misskelley, the policy had no legal effect on Misskelley’s written employment contract. Issue 3: Termination of employment Misskelley argues that his employment with Carroll County was never officially terminated as he was neither informed by the Board or Carroll County that he was terminated nor that he would not receive his entire 275 days of catastrophic leave. The circuit court found that Misskelley had notice of his termination based upon the fact that he appeared before the Board prior to December 31, 2007, to contest the Board’s termination of his leave status. The Board, on November 16, 2007, approved only fifty-two days of leave for Misskelley, pending termination date. The record supports the circuit court’s finding that Misskelley was aware of this decision by the Board, considering that he appeared before the Board at its next meeting to challenge its decision. Issue 4: Catastrophic leave clause The catastrophic-leave clause in the personnel policy handbook provided that, upon an employee’s termination, “any unused leave shall be counted as creditable service for the purposes of the retirement system[.]” Misskelley argues that this provision was meant for those employees who had not utilized their catastrophic leave due to illness or injury. Thus, he claims that since he was placed on leave prior to termination, he should have remained on leave for the remaining 223 days. The personnel policy handbook clearly states that: “Catastrophic leave can only be used by employees or appointed officials upon approval of the Sheriff of Carroll County and the Board of Supervisors of Carroll County.” This language indicates that an employee’s use of his accrued catastrophic leave is not a vested right; rather, it is a benefit conferred by the Board and Sheriff on a discretionary basis. Further, there is nothing in the handbook that states the Board is required to approve the entire amount of leave accrued by an employee. The handbook clearly states that any leave not used by termination date was to be deemed “creditable service,” and the Board adhered to this policy. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
