Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

wrongful termination

Read a random definition: Postal power

A quick definition of wrongful termination:

Wrongful termination is when someone is fired from their job in a way that breaks the rules. This can happen if the person had a contract that said they could only be fired for a good reason, or if the firing was against the law. For example, if someone was fired because of their race or because they spoke up about something bad happening at work, that would be wrongful termination. It can also be called wrongful firing, wrongful dismissal, or illegal termination.

A more thorough explanation:

Wrongful termination is when an employee is fired in a way that breaks their employment contract or goes against the law. If an employment contract says that an employee can only be fired for a specific reason, and they are fired without that reason, they can sue for wrongful termination. This usually happens when an employee is fired for no reason, which is allowed under the default rule of at-will employment. However, in some states, an employee can sue for wrongful termination if they can show that they had an implied contract for permanent employment and were fired without proper cause.

For example, if an employee handbook says that termination will only be for cause, and an employee is fired without cause, they may be able to sue for wrongful termination. Another way an employee can sue for wrongful termination is if they were fired for an illegal reason, such as discrimination or retaliation for whistleblowing.

One example of wrongful termination is when an employee is fired for refusing to break the law. In Adams v. George W. Cochran & Co., the employee was fired for refusing to do something illegal, and the court allowed their wrongful termination claim to proceed.

Wrongful termination can also be called wrongful discharge, wrongful firing, wrongful dismissal, illegal discharge, illegal termination, and illegal dismissal.

wrongful discharge | wrongful termination in violation of public policy

Warning

Info

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
21:52
i personally think it should be an 8 year term with a term limit of 3 terms. so 24 years total. and one's position can be given to another candidate as well, doesn't just always go to the incumbent
21:52
dont tell me my math is wrong im still tired
you don’t mess with the zohan is goated
glovediedthisishismom
21:52
fizzy bubbly
shaquilleoatmeal
21:53
@JumpySubsequentDolphin: you want straight up comedy or rom com?
JumpySubsequentDolphin
21:54
hmmm I think the people w me would prefer regular comedy
shaquilleoatmeal
21:54
you gotta reform congress, youd see the changes in the supreme court kick in
21:55
not to doom but there's no way conservatives would vote for a term limit on SCOTUS if the majority is going to rule in favor of conservative interests in a patterned way
21:56
for many people in politics, not just conservatives, the ends justify the means and the means could be anti-american if it means achieving a "patriotic" end so to speak
shaquilleoatmeal
21:56
crazy rich asians, due date (older side of movies), hit man
shaquilleoatmeal
21:57
actually scratch all that - watch no hard feelings
crazy rich asians is cracked
21:58
oh its so good
21:58
im probably going to take these comedy suggestions because it's just me alone until like december 1 or 2 i forgor
JumpySubsequentDolphin
21:58
@shaquilleoatmeal: my sister in law hated no hard feelings
JumpySubsequentDolphin
21:58
Constance Wu is so beautiful
i forgor
shaquilleoatmeal
21:59
damn what, i thought it was a funny movie
babycat
22:00
i went to this one club that’s in crazy rich Asians. the rooftop bar
@shaquilleoatmeal: It's not a bad article, but I still don't buy it because (a) I think it glosses over cases like Milligan way too quickly without even going into why there was an ideological split (which there was for a reason and that case did matter) and (b) I think the 3-3-3 court description is also grounded in the difference in jurisprudence between the two groups (and that they aligned on cases like the SFAA one could say more about the facts of the case, than jurisprudential differences)
babycat
22:00
It’s called ce la vie
@shaquilleoatmeal: I’ll also preface, I am a little biased—I’m a big fan of Sara Isgur and David French.
shaquilleoatmeal
22:03
^^ advisory opinions ?
shaquilleoatmeal
22:04
i was trying to get into that with scorp before lsd crashed
shaquilleoatmeal
22:04
not aware of Milligan - what was the split and why
Essentially if an Alabama redistricting map violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. It was 5-4 with Kavanaugh and Robert’s in the majority. A very important case.
@shaquilleoatmeal: yes! I love advisory opinions
shaquilleoatmeal
22:09
ahh wait i vaguely remember hearing about this, had to do with black belt and mobil i think? Ill have to go back and read it
shaquilleoatmeal
22:10
haha right on, i listen to advisory opinions during my workout when i get tired of tunes
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.