Administrator claims breach of implied employment contract. $362,000. Sacramento County.

Facts and Background

• Facts and Background:

  The employment of plaintiff, Joseph Sebastian, the Administrator for defendant, was terminated after he reported what he claimed was a workplace safety issue concerning another employee.

  Plaintiff sought past and future economic losses. Plaintiff had originally sued for wrongful termination in violation of public policy; however, that claim was dismissed on summary adjudication. The case went to trial only on the claim for breach of implied contract. Plaintiff has yet to become re-employed.

• Plaintiff's Contentions:

  That defendant breached an implied contract that plaintiff's employment could only be terminated for good cause, causing plaintiff to sustain past and future economic losses.

  Plaintiff claimed that he possessed an implied contract based on a long-standing progressive discipline policy, six years of employment with defendant, a probationary period for new employees, promises of job security, and compliments regarding his job performance. He further alleged that there was no good cause to terminate his employment.

• Defendant's Contentions:

  Defendant contended that plaintiff's employment was "at will" and that he could therefore be terminated without the need for "good cause." Defendant claimed that even if there was an implied contract, it had "good cause" to terminate plaintiff's employment because plaintiff had acted in an insubordinate fashion on several occasions, and because plaintiff exceeded his authority in conducting an investigation, on his own, regarding an employee that plaintiff claimed constituted a safety issue. Defendant further claimed that plaintiff had not mitigated his damages by obtaining other employment following his termination.