 | This article relies largely or entirely on a single source. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please help improve this article by introducing citations to additional sources. Find sources: "Brockmeyer v. Dun & Bradstreet" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (April 2022) |
| Brockmeyer v. Dun & Bradstreet | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
| Full case name | Charles J. Brockmeyer, Plaintiff-Respondent and Cross-Appellant-Petitioner, v. Dun & Bradstreet, a foreign corporation with registered agent being C.T. Corporation System, Defendant-Appellant and Cross-Respondent. |
| Decided | July 1, 1983 (1983-07-01) |
| Citation | 113 Wis.2d 561; 335 N.W.2d 834 |
| Case history | |
| Appealed from | Wisconsin Court of Appeals (109 Wis.2d 44, 1982) |
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting | Bruce F. Beilfuss, Nathan S. Heffernan, Roland B. Day, Shirley S. Abrahamson, William G. Callow, Donald W. Steinmetz, Louis J. Ceci |
| Case opinions | |
| Decision by | Steinmetz |
| Concur/dissent | Day, Callow, Ceci |
| Keywords | |
Brockmeyer v. Dun & Bradstreet 113 Wis. 2d 561, 335 N.W.2d 834 (Wis. 1983), was a case in which the Wisconsin Supreme Court first identified that Wisconsin has some judicial exceptions to the employment at will doctrine.
Facts
Charles J. Brockmeyer was employed at investment firm Dun & Bradstreet as a district manager of credit services, though he lacked a formal employment contract. After the employer settled a sex discrimination suit filed by the employee's former secretary, with whom he allegedly had an affair, the employer fired the employee. The court held that it was appropriate to create a public policy exception to the employment-at-will doctrine, as the termination had clearly violated a well-defined public policy, as evidenced by existing law. While the employer's actions may have constituted bad faith, they did not contravene the policies of any statute or constitutional provision. As the employee failed to prove that his discharge violated fundamental public policy, the decision for the employer was appropriate.
Holding
The court affirmed the decision of the lower court in favor of the employer.
Citations
The case is cited in Bammert v. Don's Super Valu, Inc.
References
- Amy Ronner, Brockmeyer v. Dun & Bradstreet: The Narrow Public Policy Exception to the Terminable-At-Will Rule, 38 University of Miami Law Review 565 (May 1, 1984).
External links
Text of Brockmeyer v. Dun & Bradstreet is available from: CourtListener Google Scholar Justia Leagle vLex
Categories: