Veno v. Meredith

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that opinions are “actionable only if” they “ ‘imply the existence of undisclosed defamatory facts’ ” (quoting Beckman v. Dunn, 419 A.2d 583, 587 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1980))
• relying on same reasoning to reject wrongful discharge claim of newspaper editor fired for publishing article criticizing judge
• relying on same reasoning to reject wrongful discharge claim of newspaper editor fired for publishing article criticizing judge
• following same reasoning to reject newspaper editor’s wrongful discharge claim brought after he was fired for publishing an article criticizing a judge
• employer’s statements to employee, including “I want to retire together,” held too broad and vague to overcome the at-will presumption
• additional consideration given the employer by the employee removes the case from the at-will doctrine

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).