Paca v. K-Mart Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that discharge for violation of company policy did not violate public policy
• finding that an employee could not rely on an employee handbook that was not given to him and did not apply to him as the basis for an implied contract modifying his employment relationship
• \Wrongful discharge requires proof that an employee performed an act favored by public policy or failed to perform a disfavored act. \
• “Wrongful discharge requires proof that an employee performed an act favored by public policy or failed to perform a disfavored act. ”
• at-will salaried employee not covered by terms of employee handbook because it applied only to wage earners
• “[T]he handbook clearly stated that ... employees were terminable ‘at will.’ Personnel manuals containing such a statement do not create an implied contract altering the parties ‘at will’ relationship.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).