Page 19 - John Hundley 2011

Sharp Thinking

No. 50 Perspectives on Developments in the Law from The Sharp Law Firm, P.C. August 2011

Court Expands Tort of Retaliatory Discharge

1
By Sara Crews, sara@lotsharp.com, 618-242-0246

In the 30 years since the Illinois Supreme Court first recognized an action for retaliatory discharge
(Palmateer v. Int’l Harvester Co., 85 Ill.2d 124 (1981), that tort has had a checkered past.

Though many recent decisions have tended to restrict the tort, a decision last month from the
Illinois Appellate Court’s Fifth District goes against that trend and may provide support for
further expansion of the doctrine.

2
In Michael v. Precision Alliance Group, LLC, 2011 IL App (5th) 100089, plaintiffs alleged that
they participated, or defendant believed they participated, in activity
which led the State to conduct a surprise investigation of defendant’s
practices in weighing and reporting weights of soybean seed.
Plaintiffs further alleged as a result of that real or perceived
participation, defendant discharged them from employment. The trial
court granted summary judgment for defendant but the appeals
panel reversed because “Plaintiffs testified to a sequence of
events and interactions with the management of defendant
sufficient to raise genuine issues of fact”. The Appellate Court
went out of its way to provide an analysis of requirements for a
retaliatory discharge claim, in addition to setting forth why there were
genuine issues of material fact precluding summary judgment. Crews

In its analysis, the court recognized that the “tort [of retaliatory discharge] is limited and narrow”
(citing Buckner v. Atlantic Plant Maint., Inc., 182 Ill.2d 12 (1998)). It then set forth the three criteria to
be met in order for an employee to maintain a claim for retaliatory discharge: “(1) the employment
was terminated by the employer, (2) the discharge was in retaliation for action of the
employee, and (3) the discharge violates a clear mandate of public policy” (citing Barr v. Kelso-
Burnett Co., 106 Ill.2d 520 (1985)).

1 Sara Crews is a paralegal working in the commercial litigation practice at The Sharp Law Firm, P.C. She
was assisted on this article by Sharp Thinking editor John Hundley.

2 Illinois Adopts New System for Official Reports. As exemplified by this citation, Illinois has
adopted a new system for official citations to decisions of its courts. Effective with decisions rendered on and
after July 1, 2011, citations to official reports published in hard-copy form are no more. In place of the hard-
copy official reports (Ill.2d, Ill.App.3d), the officially-published version of Illinois Supreme and Appellate Court
decisions will be the version posted on the courts’ websites. These will be cited by the year of decision (e.g.,
2011), the short reference to the court at issue (e.g., IL, IL App (1st), IL App (2d), etc.), and the docket number
of the case. If two or more published decisions are entered, they will be assigned letters following the docket
number – e.g., 2011 IL App (1st) 103718A, 2011 IL App (1st) 103718B, etc.

●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●
Sharp Thinking is an occasional newsletter of The Sharp Law Firm, P.C. addressing developments in the law which may be of interest. Nothing contained in Sharp
Thinking shall be construed to create an attorney-client relation where none previously has existed, nor with respect to any particular matter. The perspectives herein
constitute educational material on general legal topics and are not legal advice applicable to any particular situation. To establish an attorney-client relation or to obtain legal
advice on your particular situation, contact a Sharp lawyer at the phone number or one of the addresses provided on page 2 of this newsletter.