Legal Opinion
Weaver v. Harpster
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided July 20, 2009No. 43 MAP 2007PublishedCited by 113 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*491 OPINION
Justice BAER.
Under the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act (PHRA), 43 P.S. §§ 951-963, employers with four or more employees are prohibited from discriminating against their employees on the basis of sex. See 43 P.S. §§ 954 (defining employer), 955 (listing “unlawful discriminatory practices”). At common law, an employer may terminate an at-will employee for any reason unless that reason violates a clear mandate of public policy emanating from either the Pennsylvania Constitution or statutory pronouncements.1 In this case, we address the intersection of the PHRA and the public policy…
2Cases cited56 opinions
- Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. VinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Carole Tomka v. The Seiler Corporation, Daniel Lucey, David Polonsky and Timothy ConroyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995
- Phyllis Miller v. Maxwell's International Inc., Dba Maxwell's Plum, Debtor in Possession Carlo Galazzo, Gen. Mgt., Dino La Rosa Don Bohn Don SchupakCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
- Geary v. United States Steel Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
- Clackamas Gastroenterology Associates, P. C. v. WellsSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
51 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by113 opinions
- Dittman, B., Aplt. v. UPMCSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
- Snyder Bros., Inc. v. Pa. Pub. Util. Comm'nSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
- Marie DiFiore v. CSL Behring LLCCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2018
- Socko, D. v. Mid-Atantic Systems of CPA, Inc. ApltSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2015
- Philadelphia Housing Authority v. American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees, District Council 33, Local 934Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
108 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.