Kulins v. Malco, a Microdot Co., Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that, after the contract term providing for severance pay had been modified, employees were not entitled to accrue that benefit in the future
• recognizing that, after the contract term providing for severance pay had been modified, employees were not entitled to accrue that benefit in the future
• explaining that promissory estoppel is “an equitable device invoked to prevent a person from being injured by a change in position made in reasonable reliance on another’s conduct”
• a vested contractual right survives modification or termination of the agreement and may not be modified or eliminated by such modification or termination
• “When services are rendered, the right to secure the promised compensation is vested as much as the right to receive wages or any other form of compensation, and the lack of a promise to vest does not revoke the employer’s obligation to pay.” (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).