green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
19.3 score
“report of wrongdoing to the wrongdoer is insufficient to invoke the whistleblowing public policy exception.”
Treatment trajectory · 2014 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2014
2020
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 8 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Wright v. Catalent Pharma Solutions, LLC
report of wrongdoing to the wrongdoer is insufficient to invoke the whistleblowing public policy exception.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Foster v. MasTec North America
Haynes, 463 S.W.3d at 40 (quoting Drummond v. Land Learning Found., 358 S.W.3d 167, 171 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011), and citing Lykins v. CertainTeed Corp., 555 F. App’x 791, 794 (10th Cir. 2014)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Jacobs v. Johnson Storage & Moving Co Holdings LLC
Jacobs’s complaints to Heaney do not constitute whistleblowing under the Missouri common law public policy exception, because, as this Court previously found, “a report of wrongdoing to the wrongdoer is insufficient to invoke the whistleblowing public policy exception.” Doc. 13 at 5-6 (quoting Drummond v. Land Learning Found., 358 S.W.3d 167, 171 (Mo. App. 2011)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Steak N Shake Inc. v. White
In Drummond v. Land Learning Found., 358 S.W.3d 167, 171 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011), the Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for an employer where the “whistleblower” employee only reported his suspicions of tax fraud to the company owners whom he suspected were engaging in the fraud.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Newsome v. Kansas City, Missouri School District
The District relies on Drummond v. Land Learning Foundation, 358 S.W.3d 167, 171 (Mo. App. 2011), which held “a report of wrongdoing to the wrongdoer is insufficient to invoke the whistle-blowing public policy exception.” While the District makes this argument for both the Epps payment request and the Escapes purchase order, only the Escapes purchase order was submitted to the jury based on a whistleblowing theory; the Epps payment request was submitted to the jury based on a theory of refusal, not whistleblowing.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Charles Haynes v. Formac Stables, Inc.
(2×)
Drummond, 358 S.W.3d at 171 (citations omitted); see also Lykins v. CertainTeed Corp., 555 Fed.Appx. 791, 794 (10th Cir.2014) (holding that whistleblower status requires “reporting [illicit activity] to someone higher than the wrongdoer, either inside the company, if available, or outside the company, when internal channels are unavailing”); Chipp v. Salvation Amy, No. B167508, 2004 WL 729216 , at *4 (Cal.Ct.App.
examined
Cited "see"
Jimmy Yount v. Keller Motors, Inc.
(3×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See Drummond, 358 S.W.3d at 171 (citing Fleshner, 304 S.W.3d at 97 n.13).
cited
Cited "see"
Jones v. Galaxy 1 Marketing, Inc.
See Drummond, 358 S.W.3d at 171; Faust, 954 S.W.2d at 391 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
STATE of Missouri, Respondent,
v.
LaVincent ROBINSON, Appellant
v.
LaVincent ROBINSON, Appellant
ED 95248.
Missouri Court of Appeals.
Dec 6, 2011.
Jessica Hathaway, St. Louis, MO, for Appellant., Chris Koster, Atty. Gen., James B. Farnsworth, Jefferson City, MO, for Respondent.
Ahrens, Richter, Gaertner.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
ORDER
PER CURIAM.LaVincent Robinson appeals from the trial court’s judgment and sentence, after a jury convicted him of one count of first-degree robbery, two counts of first-degree assault, and three counts of armed criminal action. Defendant argues that the trial court erred in overruling his Batson objections and allowing the State to remove three African-American venireper-sons by peremptory challenge. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.
The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).