Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Legal Remedies
Closing The Door On The Public Policy Exception To At- Will Employment: How The Washington State Supreme Court Erroneously Foreclosed Wrongful Discharge Claims For Whistleblowers In Cudney V. Alsco, Inc., Laura A. Turczanski
Seattle University Law Review
In 2008, Matthew Cudney was terminated from his employment with ALSCO, Inc. a few weeks after reporting to his supervisor and human resources manager that he observed the branch general manager appearing intoxicated at work and driving away in a company vehicle. Cudney brought an action for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy, claiming that he was terminated in retaliation for reporting the manager’s drinking and driving. In a 5–4 decision, the Washington Supreme Court held that Cudney’s tort claim of wrongful discharge in violation of public policy could not proceed. This Note contends that the Cudney court erred …
Smith V. Bates Technical College: Washington Extends The Availability Of The Tort Of Wrongful Discharge In Violation Of Public Policy, But A Little Too Far: Employees Should Still Exhaust Other Remedies, Richard A. Morris
Seattle University Law Review
This Note will present and analyze two significant issues addressed by the Smith court. First, the court properly decided that state common law claims are not preempted by collective bargaining agreements or available administrative procedures. Second, the court incorrectly determined that exhaustion of administrative or contractual remedies is not a prerequisite to seeking tort relief in court. The judiciary should give deference to administrative or contractual procedures specifically designed to resolve the matter in dispute. This Note will analyze the preemption issue by first examining, in Part II, the general function of common law torts, the doctrine of employment-at-will, and …
The U.C.C. And Franchise Act Remedies: Coast To Coast Stores, Inc. V. Gruschus, Misty Ellen Mondress
The U.C.C. And Franchise Act Remedies: Coast To Coast Stores, Inc. V. Gruschus, Misty Ellen Mondress
Seattle University Law Review
Coast to Coast Stores, Inc. v. Gruschus was the first Washington case to deal with the potential conflict between the Uniform Commercial Code (U.C.C.) and the Franchise Investment Protection Act (FIPA), arising when a franchisor repossesses goods after a franchisee defaults under a security agreement. The Washington Supreme Court avoided the conflict, however, by holding that because the franchisor never terminated the franchise, the FIPA protections were not triggered. The U.C.C. remedies therefore applied: the franchisor could collect the proceeds of a liquidation sale of the secured goods-in this case the franchisee's inventory and supplies-in reduction of the franchisee's indebtedness; …