From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rotondo v. Seaboard Foundry, Inc.

Supreme Court of Rhode Island
Oct 16, 1981
440 A.2d 751 (R.I. 1981)

Summary

In Rotondo the plaintiff specifically argued in his brief to the Rhode Island Supreme Court that the wrongful discharge of an at-will employee should be actionable both in contract and in tort.

Summary of this case from Brainard v. Imperial Mfg. Co.

Opinion

No. 80-245-Appeal.

October 16, 1981.

Edward John Mulligan, Carolyn E. Mulligan, Warwick, for plaintiff.

Gunning, LaFazia Gnys, Inc., Guy J. Wells, Jeanne Ellen LaFazia, Providence, for defendant.


ORDER

This is an employment-contract dispute in which the plaintiff claims that the defendant, in discharging him, wrongfully breached his employment contract. In its complaint, the plaintiff described the contract as "an oral contract of employment for an indefinite period of time." At trial, the defendant, after both sides had rested, sought a directed verdict. The trial justice reserved decision on the motion and submitted the case to the jury, which in turn returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff for $25,000. Immediately thereafter the trial justice directed a verdict for the defendant, relying on the settled rule which holds that a promise to render personal services to another for an indefinite term is terminable at any time at the will of either party.

On October 5, 1981, plaintiff appeared before us and attempted to show why his appeal should not be summarily dismissed in light of the principle alluded to above and repeated in Oken v. National Chain Co., R.I., 424 A.2d 234, 237 (1981), and School Committee of Providence v. Board of Regents, 112 R.I. 288, 291, 308 A.2d 788, 790 (1973). See also Ventetuolo v. Burke, 596 F.2d 476, 481 (1st Cir. 1971); 1 Corbin, Contracts § 70 at 292-93 and § 96 n. 22 at 418-19 (1963); 9 Williston, Contracts § 1017 at 129-30 (3d ed. 1967); 62 A.L.R.3d 271 (1975).

After consideration of the record and arguments of counsel, we are of the opinion that no cause has been shown. Consequently, the plaintiff's appeal is denied and dismissed, the judgment appealed from is affirmed, and the case is remanded to the Superior Court.


Summaries of

Rotondo v. Seaboard Foundry, Inc.

Supreme Court of Rhode Island
Oct 16, 1981
440 A.2d 751 (R.I. 1981)

In Rotondo the plaintiff specifically argued in his brief to the Rhode Island Supreme Court that the wrongful discharge of an at-will employee should be actionable both in contract and in tort.

Summary of this case from Brainard v. Imperial Mfg. Co.
Case details for

Rotondo v. Seaboard Foundry, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:Felice ROTONDO v. SEABOARD FOUNDRY, INC

Court:Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Date published: Oct 16, 1981

Citations

440 A.2d 751 (R.I. 1981)

Citing Cases

Brainard v. Imperial Mfg. Co.

Defendant also argues that plaintiff fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted under Rhode…

Russell v. Salve Regina College

In the employer-employee environment, no less an authority than the Supreme Court of Rhode Island has…