The Oyez Project Virtual Tour of the Supreme Court Building

Abstract

Argument: Tuesday, November 10, 1998
Decision: Monday, December 14, 1998
Issues: Liability, Civil Rights Acts

Advocates

Phillip A. Bradley (Argued the cause for the respondents)
Matthew D. Roberts (Department of Justice, for the United States, as amicus curiae, supporting the petitioner)
Charles C. Stebbins (Argued the cause for the petitioner)

Facts of the Case

Michael A. Haddle, an at-will employee for Healthmaster, Inc., filed suit in federal court alleging his employer, along with 2 previous Healthmaster, Inc. officers, Jeanette Garrison and Dennis Kelly, conspired to have him fired in retaliation for obeying a federal grand jury subpoena and later testifying in a criminal trial against Healthmaster, Inc. for Medicare fraud. Haddle claimed his employers' acts had had "injured [him] in his person or property" in violation of federal law, specifically the Civil Rights Act of 1871. The District Court, relying on precedent, dismissed the suit for failure to state a claim. The precedent the court cited held that an at-will employee discharged pursuant to a conspiracy proscribed by the Act has suffered no actual injury because he has no constitutionally protected interest in continued employment. The Court of Appeals affirmed.

Question

May at-will employees sue their employers over firings allegedly carried out to retaliate for testimony against their employers?

Conclusion

Yes. In a unanimous decision, announced by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, the Court ruled that such interference may give rise to a claim for damages under the Civil Rights Act of 1871. "The kind of interference with at-will employment relations alleged here is merely a species of the traditional torts of intentional interference with contractual relations and intentional interference with prospective contractual relations," wrote Chief Justice Rehnquist.

Supreme Court Justice Opinions and Votes (by Seniority)

Sort by Ideology
(More information here)
Decision: 9 votes for Haddle, 0 vote(s) against
Legal Provision: Reconstruction Civil Rights Acts (42 USC 1985)
Wrote the majority opinion
Rehnquist
Voted with the majority
Stevens
Voted with the majority
O'Connor
Voted with the majority
Scalia
Voted with the majority
Kennedy
Voted with the majority
Souter
Voted with the majority
Thomas
Voted with the majority
Ginsburg
Voted with the majority
Breyer
Full Opinion by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist

Cite this page

The Oyez Project, Haddle v. Garrison, 525 U.S. 121 (1998),
available at: <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1998/1998_97_1472/>
(last visited ).