at-will presumption in Wyoming

2000Brodie v. General Chemical Corporation, 934 P.2d 1263, 1265 (Wyo.1997); Davis, 934 P.2d at 1249 .

1999Brodie v. General Chemical Corporation, 934 P.2d 1263, 1265 (Wyo.1997); Davis, 934 P.2d at 1249 .

2000Wilder, 868 P.2d at 218 (holding that employer promise of "permanent" employment does not alter the at-will presumption without additional consideration supplied by the employee or explicit language in the contract of employment stating that termination may only be for cause); Bear v. Volunteers of America, Wyoming, Inc., 964 P.2d at 1250.

2000Wilder, 868 P.2d at 218 (holding that employer promise of "permanent" employment does not alter the at-will presumption without additional consideration supplied by the employee or explicit language in the contract of employment stating that termination may only be for cause); Bear v. Volunteers of America, Wyoming, Inc., 964 P.2d at 1250.

1998Id.; McDonald v. Mobil Coal Producing, Inc., 820 P.2d 986, 990 (Wyo.1991).

1997McDonald v. Mobil Coal Producing, Inc., 820 P.2d 986, 990 (Wyo.1991).

2010Reynolds does not cite any case law in support of this theory, and we have held that "[tlhe existence of a contractual implied covenant [of good faith and fair dealing] is obviously incompatible with the at-will presumption and is not applicable in those situations." Scherer Constr., LLC v. Hedquist Constr., Inc., 2001 WY 23, ¶23 , 18 P.3d 645, 655 (Wyo.2001).

2010Reynolds does not cite any case law in support of this theory, and we have held that "[tlhe existence of a contractual implied covenant [of good faith and fair dealing] is obviously incompatible with the at-will presumption and is not applicable in those situations." Scherer Constr., LLC v. Hedquist Constr., Inc., 2001 WY 23, ¶23 , 18 P.3d 645, 655 (Wyo.2001).

1997Loghry , at 710-11.

1997Wilder v. Cody Country Chamber of Commerce, 868 P.2d 211, 217 (Wyo.1994); Lincoln v. Wackenhut Corp., 867 P.2d 701, 708 (Wyo.1994).

1996Garcia v. UniWyo Federal Credit Union, 920 P.2d 642, 647 (Wyo.1996).

1992Capriulo v. Bankers Life Co., 178 Ga.App. 635 , 344 S.E.2d 430, 434 (1986).

1992Capriulo v. Bankers Life Co., 178 Ga.App. 635 , 344 S.E.2d 430, 434 (1986).

1990Although I concur in most aspects of the majority opinion, I dissent from that part of it that holds that “the public policy exception to the employment-at-will doctrine [does] not apply to the termination of employment contracts between school districts and initial contract teachers.” This court identified the rationale supporting the public policy exception to the at-will rule in Allen v. Safeway Stores, Incorporated, 699 P.2d 277, 284 (Wyo.1985): A tort action premised on violation of public policy results from a recognition that allowing a discharge to go unre-dressed would leave a valuabl

1990Although I concur in most aspects of the majority opinion, I dissent from that part of it that holds that "the public policy exception to the employment-at-will doctrine [does] not apply to the termination of employment contracts between school districts and initial contract teachers." This court identified the rationale supporting the public policy exception to the at-will rule in Allen v. Safeway Stores, Incorporated, 699 P.2d 277, 284 (Wyo. 1985): A tort action premised on violation of public policy results from a recognition that allowing a discharge to go unredressed would leave a valuabl

1990As it was so aptly put by the Arizona Supreme Court in Wagner v. City of Globe, 150 Ariz. 82 , 722 P.2d 250, 255-56 (1986), [e]mployees should not have to choose between their jobs and the demands of important public policy interests * * *. [E]mployees should not be discharged because they performed an act that public policy would encourage * * *.

1990As it was so aptly put by the Arizona Supreme Court in Wagner v. City of Globe, 150 Ariz. 82 , 722 P.2d 250, 255-56 (1986), [e]mployees should not have to choose between their jobs and the demands of important public policy interests * * *. [E]mployees should not be discharged because they performed an act that public policy would encourage * * *.

1989See Kouff v. Bethlehem-Alameda Shipyard, 90 Cal.App.2d 322 , 202 P.2d 1059 (1949) (statute prohibiting discharge for serving as an election officer).

1989See Kouff v. Bethlehem-Alameda Shipyard, 90 Cal.App.2d 322 , 202 P.2d 1059 (1949) (statute prohibiting discharge for serving as an election officer).

1989This doctrine was explained in Wagenseller v. Scottsdale Memorial Hospital, 147 Ariz. 370 , 710 P.2d 1025, 1031-32 (1985) (footnotes omitted): *76 The public policy exception to the at-will doctrine began with a narrow rule permitting employees to sue their employers when a statute expressly prohibited their discharge.

1989This doctrine was explained in Wagenseller v. Scottsdale Memorial Hospital, 147 Ariz. 370 , 710 P.2d 1025, 1031-32 (1985) (footnotes omitted): *76 The public policy exception to the at-will doctrine began with a narrow rule permitting employees to sue their employers when a statute expressly prohibited their discharge.