Conner v. Department of Commerce
443 P.3d 1250
Utah Ct. App.2019Background
- Rebekah Conner, an at-will administrative assistant exempt from career-service protections, was fired in 2013 and sued the State Department of Commerce and director Francine Giani for wrongful termination, citing Utah Code § 67-19-18(2) and Utah Admin. Code R477-2-3(2) (prohibiting dismissal for "political affiliation").
- Defendants pleaded affirmative defenses including "absolute and qualified immunity" (governmental immunity) and initially pleaded but later withdrew a procedural GIA notice defense; they did not move on immunity before the pretrial deadline.
- One business day before trial defendants filed a Utah R. Civ. P. 12(c) motion for judgment on the pleadings, asserting governmental immunity; the district court deferred ruling until after trial.
- The jury found for Conner on wrongful termination and awarded $240,000. After trial the court granted the 12(c) motion, concluding Conner’s claim was a tort (wrongful termination in violation of public policy) for which governmental immunity was not waived, and dismissed the claim despite the jury verdict.
- Conner moved under Utah R. Civ. P. 15(b) to amend pleadings to conform to evidence (to assert a statutory enforcement claim) and also challenged timeliness and waiver; the court denied amendment and the motion to alter judgment. Conner appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the amended complaint could be read or amended to state a private statutory enforcement claim under Utah Code § 67-19-18(2) (avoiding immunity) | Conner: pleadings and trial evidence support construing/amending the claim as statutory enforcement of § 67-19-18(2) (not a tort) | Defendants: USPMA § 67-19-18(2) does not create a private right of action; Conner’s claim is a tort for public-policy wrongful termination (immunity applies) | Court: No private right of action exists under § 67-19-18(2); claim was a tort and is barred by governmental immunity; amendment denied |
| Whether defendants waived governmental immunity by pleading imperfect language or withdrawing a related defense and by late pursuit of the defense | Conner: defendants’ pleadings and conduct waived/abandoned governmental immunity, making late 12(c) untimely and unfair | Defendants: they preserved immunity in the thirteenth defense and never abandoned it; late motion did not effect waiver | Court: No waiver. Pleading "absolute and qualified immunity" was adequate; withdrawal of procedural notice defense did not waive immunity |
| Whether the district court abused discretion by permitting a 12(c) motion filed on the eve of trial and deferring ruling until after trial | Conner: last-minute filing prejudiced her trial presentation and was untimely under Rule 12(c) | Defendants: Rule 12(d) permits deferral; court may manage docket and reserve legal issues for post-liability ruling | Court: No abuse of discretion. Court permissibly deferred ruling under Rule 12(d); timing alone did not bar the defense |
| Whether Conner’s procedural due process rights were violated by the timing and handling of the 12(c) motion | Conner: she was denied meaningful notice and opportunity to preserve/try a statutory claim | Defendants: issue was not preserved below; on the merits a statutory cause of action does not exist anyway | Court: Due process claim unpreserved on appeal; no preserved exception argued, so not considered (and would fail on the merits given no private right of action) |
Key Cases Cited
- Hansen v. America Online, Inc., 96 P.3d 950 (Utah 2004) (establishes wrongful termination-in-violation-of-public-policy tort exception to at-will rule)
- Buckner v. Kennard, 99 P.3d 842 (Utah 2004) (courts reluctant to imply private causes of action absent legislative direction)
- Broadbent v. Board of Educ. of Cache County School Dist., 910 P.2d 1274 (Utah Ct. App. 1996) (governmental immunity bars wrongful-termination tort claims against state absent waiver)
- Hart v. Salt Lake County Comm’n, 945 P.2d 125 (Utah Ct. App. 1997) (defendant may waive governmental immunity by abandoning the defense and failing to raise it through trial)
- Ferree v. State, 784 P.2d 149 (Utah 1989) (governmental immunity conceptually arises after liability issue; courts may address liability before immunity)
- Maxfield v. Herbert, 284 P.3d 647 (Utah 2012) (appellate standard: district court docket and trial-management decisions reviewed for abuse of discretion)