Michael O. Read v. Willwoods Community
165 So. 3d 883
La.2015Background
- Willwoods, a Catholic non-profit, created an Executive Director position in early 2009 as part of a succession plan for Father Chambers; a search committee interviewed candidates on Feb. 19, 2009 and later chose Michael Read.
- At the interview a committee member (Veters) allegedly asked Read, then 65, whether he could "commit" for five or six years; committee members testified they never discussed or intended a specific fixed-term offer at that time.
- No written contract was executed. Willwoods formally offered the job (and Read accepted) at a meeting on April 24, 2009; salary, benefits, start date, and board membership were discussed, but no fixed term was mentioned.
- Read began work June 1, 2009; by mid-2010 Willwoods moved to terminate him, and a termination letter was sent June 23, 2010. Read sued seeking damages for breach of an alleged five-year employment contract.
- A jury returned a 9–3 verdict for Read finding an oral five-year contract; the trial court entered judgment and the court of appeal affirmed. The Louisiana Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether parties formed an oral limited-term (five-year) employment contract | Read: interview question + his acceptance and leaving secure job constituted meeting of the minds for a 5-year term | Willwoods: no specific term was offered or discussed at offer/acceptance; interview comments were general and not an offer | Court held Read failed to prove a meeting of the minds for a 5-year contract — no limited-term contract existed |
| Whether plaintiff provided the required corroboration for an oral contract over $500 (La. C.C. art. 1846) | Read: his testimony plus surrounding circumstances (committee’s desire for commitment, his job resignation) corroborate the oral promise | Willwoods: testimony shows committee never agreed to or offered a definite term; circumstantial evidence is insufficient | Court held corroboration insufficient; objective evidence of a fixed term absent; jury finding clearly wrong |
| Legal consequence if no limited-term contract exists | Read: entitlement to damages for remainder of five-year salary/benefits if contract found | Willwoods: absent a fixed-term contract, employment is at-will and no recovery for termination | Court held employment was at-will; Read has no enforceable claim for dismissal damages |
Key Cases Cited
- Suire v. Lafayette City-Parish Consol. Government, 907 So.2d 37 (La. 2005) (standards for proving oral contracts and corroboration)
- Quebedeaux v. Dow Chemical Co., 820 So.2d 542 (La. 2002) (discussion of employment contract types and at-will presumption)
- Stobart v. State through Dept. of Transp. and Development, 617 So.2d 880 (La. 1993) (manifest error/clearly wrong standard for review of factual findings)
- Andrepont v. Lake Charles Harbor and Terminal Dist., 602 So.2d 704 (La. 1992) (employer liability for terminating limited-term employment without cause)
- Brodhead v. Bd. of Trustees for State Colleges and Universities, 588 So.2d 748 (La. App.) (treatment of limited-term employment principles)