Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
21 Alabama opinions name it 2 courts 1984–2003 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Alabama courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Twilley v. Daubert Coated Products, Inc.green2 sentences2000Section 25-5-11.1 states that "[n]o employee shall be terminated by an employer solely because the employee has instituted or maintained any action against the employer to recover workers' compensation benefits." See Twilley v. Daubert Coated Products, Inc., 536 So.2d 1364 (Ala.1988). 2000Section 25-5-11.1 states that "[n]o employee shall be terminated by an employer solely because the employee has instituted or maintained any action against the employer to recover workers' compensation benefits." See Twilley v. Daubert Coated Products, Inc. , 536 So.2d 1364 (Ala. 1988). | 3 | 4 |
Hinrichs v. Tranquilaire Hospitalgreen2 sentences1987The rule, stated simply, is that "an employment contract at will may be terminated by either party with or without cause or justification." Hinrichs v. Tranquilaire Hospital, 352 So.2d 1130, 1131 (Ala.1977). 1987In Hinrichs v. Tranquilaire Hospital, 352 So.2d 1130 (Ala.1977), this Court, in a modern-day pronouncement of the rule, explained why it would not adopt an exception: An exception would (1) "abrogate the inherent right to contract between employer and employee"; (2) "overrule existing Alabama law"; and (3) invade the province of the legislature, the body best suited for the creation of such an exception. | 2 | 2 |
Hoffman-La Roche, Inc. v. Campbellgreen2 sentences2003If that discussion is intended as an analogy, even the analogy fails because the employer can voluntarily relinquish its employment-at-will prerogative to discharge the employee without cause, see Hoffman-La Roche v. Campbell, 512 So.2d 725 (Ala.1987), much as any party can voluntarily undertake a duty the party would not otherwise owe, Spriggs v. Compass Bank, 742 So.2d 178, 181 (Ala.Civ. 2002See Hoffman-La Roche, Inc. v. Campbell, 512 So.2d 725 (Ala.1987). | 1 | 3 |
Alabama Mills, Inc. v. Smithgreen2 sentences1984Instead of applying the employment-at-will doctrine, however, the trial judge ruled: "The requirements for a contract of permanent employment to be binding, as it was held in Alabama Mills, Inc. v. Smith , [ 237 Ala. 296 ,] 186 So. 699 (Ala.Sup.Ct. 1939) and more recent cases following the above, include the requirement that it is necessary to show a valuable consideration supplied by the employee other than services to be rendered for which he is to be paid. 1984Instead of applying the employment-at-will doctrine, however, the trial judge ruled: "The requirements for a contract of permanent employment to be binding, as it was held in Alabama Mills, Inc. v. Smith , [ 237 Ala. 296 ,] 186 So. 699 (Ala.Sup.Ct. 1939) and more recent cases following the above, include the requirement that it is necessary to show a valuable consideration supplied by the employee other than services to be rendered for which he is to be paid. | 1 | 2 |
Spriggs v. Compass Bankgreen1 sentence2003If that discussion is intended as an analogy, even the analogy fails because the employer can voluntarily relinquish its employment-at-will prerogative to discharge the employee without cause, see Hoffman-La Roche v. Campbell, 512 So.2d 725 (Ala.1987), much as any party can voluntarily undertake a duty the party would not otherwise owe, Spriggs v. Compass Bank, 742 So.2d 178, 181 (Ala.Civ. | 1 | 1 |
Shelby v. Zayre Corp.green1 sentence1988See Shelby v. Zayre Corp. , 474 So.2d 1069 , 1071 (Ala. 1985). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Meeks v. OPP Cotton Mills, Inc.
green
2 sentences2003Section 25-5-11.1 provides, in pertinent part: "No employee shall be terminated by an employer solely because the employee has instituted or maintained any action against the employer to recover workers' compensation benefits under this chapter. . . ." (Emphasis added.) This statutory provision prohibiting retaliatory discharge was enacted in response to this Court's 5-4 decision in Meeks v. Opp Cotton Mills, Inc. , 459 So.2d 814 (Ala. 1984), where the Court acknowledged the employment at-will doctrine and refused to recognize an exception in a case in which an employee maintained that his dis 1998In Meeks v. Opp Cotton Mills, Inc., 459 So.2d 814 (Ala.1984), this Court declined to create an exception to the employment-at-will doctrine for retaliatory discharges. | 3 | 1987–2003 |
Morgan v. NORTHEAST ALABAMA REG. MED. CTR.
green
2 sentences1998Morgan v. Northeast Alabama Regional Medical Center, 624 So.2d 560 (Ala. 1993). 1997Morgan v. Northeast Alabama Regional Medical Ctr. , 624 So.2d 560 (Ala. 1993). | 3 | 1996–1998 |
Howard v. East Tenn., Va. & Ga. Railroad
green
2 sentences1987Ninety-six years ago, in Howard v. East Tennessee, Virginia & Georgia Railroad, 91 Ala. 268 , 8 So. 868 (1891), this Court adopted what is commonly known as the employment-at-will rule. 1984Ry., 91 Ala. 268 , 8 So. 868 (1891). | 2 | 1984–1987 |
Bender Ship Repair, Inc. v. Stevens
green
1 sentence2003In Meeks , this Court referred to Bender Ship Repair, Inc. v. Stevens , 379 So.2d 594 (Ala. 1980), in which the Court had refused to recognize an exception to the at-will doctrine for an employee who alleged that he had been fired because he had missed work to serve on a grand jury. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Bleier v. Wellington Sears Company
green
1 sentence2002"Under Alabama law, an employment contract is terminable at will by either party — for a good reason, a wrong reason, or no reason at all. . . . [However, in] order to ameliorate the effect of the employment-at-will doctrine in the context of an employee discharged for filing a claim for workers' compensation benefits, the Legislature . . . enacted § 25-5-11.1 , Ala. Code 1975." Bleier v. Wellington Sears Co. , 757 So.2d 1163 , 1167-68 (Ala. 2000). | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Motion Industries, Inc. v. Pate
green
1 sentence1997In pertinent part, Ala. Code 1975, § 25-5-11.1 , provides: "No employee shall be terminated by an employer solely because the employee has instituted or maintained any action against the employer to recover workers' compensation benefits under this chapter. . . ." In Motion Indus., Inc. v. Pate , 678 So.2d 724 (Ala. 1996), our Supreme Court discussed the proper construction of § 25-5-11.1 : "This section was enacted to offset the harsh effects of the employment-at-will doctrine. | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Salter v. Alfa Ins. Co., Inc.
green
1 sentence1991He aptly noted that "[i]t is beyond question that the employment-at-will rule allows employers to effectively pressure employees to commit wrongful or illegal acts through the threat of dismissal for not complying with the employee's demands." 561 So.2d at 1055 . | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Palmateer v. International Harvester Co.
green
2 sentences1990Although there is no precise line of demarcation dividing matters that are the subject of public policies from matters purely personal, a survey of cases in other States involving retaliatory discharges shows that a matter must strike at the heart of a citizen's social rights, duties, and responsibilities before the tort will be allowed." 85 Ill.2d at 130 , 52 Ill.Dec. at 15-16, 421 N.E.2d at 878-79 . *1057 Any remedy based on a public policy exception to the employment-at-will doctrine should be narrowly tailored to avoid any undue infringement on the employer's right to discipline and contro 1990Although there is no precise line of demarcation dividing matters that are the subject of public policies from matters purely personal, a survey of cases in other States involving retaliatory discharges shows that a matter must strike at the heart of a citizen's social rights, duties, and responsibilities before the tort will be allowed." 85 Ill.2d at 130 , 52 Ill.Dec. at 15-16, 421 N.E.2d at 878-79 . *1057 Any remedy based on a public policy exception to the employment-at-will doctrine should be narrowly tailored to avoid any undue infringement on the employer's right to discipline and contro | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Harrell v. Reynolds Metals Co.
green
2 sentences1989We note initially that Bosarge's contract contained an employment-at-will clause, which stated as follows: "[W]e or you can terminate this contract at any time." Bosarge relies on Harrell v. Reynolds Metals Co. , 495 So.2d 1381 (Ala. 1986), wherein this Court stated that "[a]n employee at will cannot be wrongfully terminated unless such termination is for a reason which contravenes public policy." Id. at 1387 . 1989We note initially that Bosarge's contract contained an employment-at-will clause, which stated as follows: "[W]e or you can terminate this contract at any time." Bosarge relies on Harrell v. Reynolds Metals Co. , 495 So.2d 1381 (Ala. 1986), wherein this Court stated that "[a]n employee at will cannot be wrongfully terminated unless such termination is for a reason which contravenes public policy." Id. at 1387 . | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Reich v. Holiday Inn
neutral
1 sentence1987Williams v. Killough, 474 So.2d 680 (Ala. 1985); Meeks v. Opp Cotton Mills, Inc., 459 So.2d 814 (Ala.1984); Reich v. Holiday Inn, 454 So.2d 982 (Ala.1984); Johnson v. Gary, 443 So.2d 924 (Ala.1983); Kitsos v. Mobile Gas Service Corp., 431 So.2d 1150 (Ala.1983); White v. Chelsea Industries, Inc., 425 So.2d 1090 (Ala.1983); Dreyspring v. Kar Products, Inc., 422 So.2d 764 (Ala.1982); Meredith v. C.E. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Kitsos v. Mobile Gas Service Corporation
green
1 sentence1987Williams v. Killough, 474 So.2d 680 (Ala. 1985); Meeks v. Opp Cotton Mills, Inc., 459 So.2d 814 (Ala.1984); Reich v. Holiday Inn, 454 So.2d 982 (Ala.1984); Johnson v. Gary, 443 So.2d 924 (Ala.1983); Kitsos v. Mobile Gas Service Corp., 431 So.2d 1150 (Ala.1983); White v. Chelsea Industries, Inc., 425 So.2d 1090 (Ala.1983); Dreyspring v. Kar Products, Inc., 422 So.2d 764 (Ala.1982); Meredith v. C.E. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Ralls v. FIRST FED. SAV. & LOAN ASS'N, ETC.
green
1 sentence1987Williams v. Killough, 474 So.2d 680 (Ala. 1985); Meeks v. Opp Cotton Mills, Inc., 459 So.2d 814 (Ala.1984); Reich v. Holiday Inn, 454 So.2d 982 (Ala.1984); Johnson v. Gary, 443 So.2d 924 (Ala.1983); Kitsos v. Mobile Gas Service Corp., 431 So.2d 1150 (Ala.1983); White v. Chelsea Industries, Inc., 425 So.2d 1090 (Ala.1983); Dreyspring v. Kar Products, Inc., 422 So.2d 764 (Ala.1982); Meredith v. C.E. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Johnson v. Gary
green
1 sentence1987Williams v. Killough, 474 So.2d 680 (Ala. 1985); Meeks v. Opp Cotton Mills, Inc., 459 So.2d 814 (Ala.1984); Reich v. Holiday Inn, 454 So.2d 982 (Ala.1984); Johnson v. Gary, 443 So.2d 924 (Ala.1983); Kitsos v. Mobile Gas Service Corp., 431 So.2d 1150 (Ala.1983); White v. Chelsea Industries, Inc., 425 So.2d 1090 (Ala.1983); Dreyspring v. Kar Products, Inc., 422 So.2d 764 (Ala.1982); Meredith v. C.E. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
White v. Chelsea Industries, Inc.
green
1 sentence1987Williams v. Killough, 474 So.2d 680 (Ala. 1985); Meeks v. Opp Cotton Mills, Inc., 459 So.2d 814 (Ala.1984); Reich v. Holiday Inn, 454 So.2d 982 (Ala.1984); Johnson v. Gary, 443 So.2d 924 (Ala.1983); Kitsos v. Mobile Gas Service Corp., 431 So.2d 1150 (Ala.1983); White v. Chelsea Industries, Inc., 425 So.2d 1090 (Ala.1983); Dreyspring v. Kar Products, Inc., 422 So.2d 764 (Ala.1982); Meredith v. C.E. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Williams v. Killough
green
1 sentence1987Williams v. Killough, 474 So.2d 680 (Ala. 1985); Meeks v. Opp Cotton Mills, Inc., 459 So.2d 814 (Ala.1984); Reich v. Holiday Inn, 454 So.2d 982 (Ala.1984); Johnson v. Gary, 443 So.2d 924 (Ala.1983); Kitsos v. Mobile Gas Service Corp., 431 So.2d 1150 (Ala.1983); White v. Chelsea Industries, Inc., 425 So.2d 1090 (Ala.1983); Dreyspring v. Kar Products, Inc., 422 So.2d 764 (Ala.1982); Meredith v. C.E. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Jones v. Ethridge
green
1 sentence1987Jones v. Ethridge, 497 So.2d 1107 (Ala.1986). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Waldon v. Hartford Ins. Group
green
2 sentences1985I First, because there are clearly inequities relative to the mechanics of recovery under Alabama's Workmen's Compensation Act, and it appears that those inequities are encouraged, in part, by this court's recent interpretation of the exclusivity provision of the Act, I would reconsider our decision in Waldon v. Hartford Insurance Group , 435 So.2d 1271 (Ala. 1983). 1985I First, because there are clearly inequities relative to the mechanics of recovery under Alabama's Workmen's Compensation Act, and it appears that those inequities are encouraged, in part, by this court's recent interpretation of the exclusivity provision of the Act, I would reconsider our decision in Waldon v. Hartford Insurance Group, 435 So.2d 1271 (Ala.1983). | 1 | 1985–1985 |
McKinney v. Kimberly-Clark Corp.
green
1 sentence1984The employment-at-will rule has already been abrogated to some extent by a majority of this Court in Ex parte Kimberly-Clark Corp., 449 So.2d 794 (Ala.1983). | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.