858 F. Supp. 2d 65
D.D.C.2012Background
- Plaintiff Robert Jackson, employed since December 2008 as Deputy Director, Operations and Infrastructure of PCAOB's Office of Information Technology, stops employment in January 2012.
- PCAOB conducted an internal investigation into OIT governance and staffing beginning around 2010; Jackson was among three senior OIT staff interviewed and provided information.
- Final investigative report released October 2011 contained negative remarks about OIT, which Jackson contends reflected his input.
- After the report, a new Deputy Chief Administrative Officer was added and began reporting to Jackson's superior, altering reporting lines.
- On December 9, 2011, the new DCAO allegedly leveled unfounded accusations about Jackson, removed staff, and threatened job insecurity.
- Jackson allegedly sought relief by consulting PCAOB’s ethics officer and in-house counsel, who proposed termination with severance; Jackson claims conditions became intolerable and he was constructively discharged around January 2012.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the anti-retaliation policy create enforceable contractual rights? | Policy creates contract for retaliation protection. | Manual contains clear disclaimer that policy is not a contract. | Policy does not create enforceable contractual rights. |
| Whether breach of contract claim survives under at-will employment | Anti-retaliation policy breach implies contractual breach. | At-will disclaimer bars contract claim. | Breach of contract claim dismissed. |
| Whether wrongful termination claim is viable under D.C. public policy exceptions | Termination violated public policy via policy against retaliation. | No identified constitutional/statutory public policy to support exception. | Wrongful termination claim dismissed for lack of identified public policy. |
Key Cases Cited
- Futrell v. Dept. of Labor Federal Credit Union, 816 A.2d 793 (D.C. App. 2003) (manual disclaims contract rights; disclaimer controls)
- Boulton v. Institute of Intern. Educ., 808 A.2d 499 (D.C. 2002) (handbook language preserving at-will nature defeats implied contract)
- Grove v. Loomis Sayles & Co., L.P., 810 F. Supp. 2d 146 (D.D.C. 2011) (handbook not enforceable if it disclaims contractual obligations)
- Adams v. George W. Cochran & Co., Inc., 597 A.2d 28 (D.C. 1991) (very narrow at-will public policy exception)
- Carl v. Children’s Hospital, 702 A.2d 159 (D.C. 1997) (public policy exceptions to at-will must be anchored in statute or constitution)
- Davis v. Gables Residential/H.G. Smithy, 525 F. Supp. 2d 87 (D.D.C. 2007) (failure to identify public policy defeats wrongful discharge claim)
- Chisholm v. District of Columbia, 666 F. Supp. 2d 96 (D.D.C. 2009) (requires explicit public policy for wrongful termination claim)
- Lurie v. Mid-Atlantic Permanente Medical Group, P.C., 729 F. Supp. 2d 304 (D.D.C. 2010) (public policy requirements for wrongful termination claims)
- Liberatore v. Melville Corp., 168 F.3d 1326 (D.C. Cir. 1999) (illustrates public policy considerations in wrongful termination)