Bouknight v. KW Associates LLC
3:16-cv-00210
D.S.C.Jun 16, 2016Background
- Plaintiff Kevin Bouknight worked for KW Associates, LLC and alleges he was terminated after hiring an attorney following a workers’ compensation claim.
- Bouknight asserted claims for wrongful termination in violation of public policy and negligent misrepresentation (later added a fraudulent misrepresentation claim).
- Defendants moved to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6); the Magistrate Judge recommended dismissal of both challenged claims.
- Bouknight filed objections; the district court reviewed the Report de novo and adopted it in full.
- The court dismissed with prejudice Bouknight’s wrongful termination and negligent misrepresentation claims as alleged in the Second Amended Complaint.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether termination for hiring counsel supports a wrongful termination (public policy) claim | Hiring counsel and related authorities (rules, constitutional provisions, fee-shifting, attorney-client protections) establish a public policy protecting consultation/hiring of attorneys | No clear, specific public policy mandate protects hiring counsel here; existing statutory remedy (workers’ compensation retaliation) covers the subject matter | Dismissed — no clear, articulable public policy to support novel wrongful termination claim; statute precludes overlap |
| Whether negligent misrepresentation claim survives where alleged statement concerned future employment | Bouknight contends negligent misrepresentation can overlap with fraudulent misrepresentation as a lesser-included tort | The statement was an intentional promise about future employment; if false at the time, it is intentional/fraudulent, not merely negligent | Dismissed — allegations concern an intentional false promise about future conduct, so negligent misrepresentation cannot stand |
| Whether novel public-policy wrongful discharge claims must survive at pleading stage | Bouknight argues state courts sometimes allow novel theories to proceed past dismissal to develop facts | Defendants argue court may decide public policy as a question of law and dismiss at pleading stage when no clear policy exists | Court: Public policy is a question of law; dismissal appropriate here given lack of clear mandate and legislative remedies |
| Whether statutory remedy (S.C. Code Ann. § 41-1-80) bars overlap with common-law wrongful discharge | Bouknight does not rely on § 41-1-80 to establish public policy but argues his claim is distinct | Defendants argue statutory anti-retaliation scheme addresses the subject matter and precludes duplicative common-law claims | Court: Legislative scheme covers the area; wrongful discharge exception does not extend where statutory remedy exists |
Key Cases Cited
- Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261 (procedure for magistrate judge recommendations)
- Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310 (standard of review for unobjected magistrate reports)
- Barron v. Labor Finders of S.C., 713 S.E.2d 634 (public policy wrongful termination; procedural considerations)
- Taghivand v. Rite Aid Corp., 768 S.E.2d 385 (refusal to expand public-policy wrongful termination; courts must exercise restraint)
- Turner v. Milliman, 708 S.E.2d 766 (distinguishing negligent and fraudulent misrepresentation; future promises)
- M.B. Kahn Const. Co. v. S.C. Nat. Bank of Charleston, 271 S.E.2d 414 (fraudulent misrepresentation elements)
- Stiles v. American Gen’l Life Ins. Co., 516 S.E.2d 449 (wrongful termination not available where statutory remedy exists)
- Dockins v. Ingles Markets, Inc., 413 S.E.2d 18 (same principle regarding statutory remedies)