Legal Opinion

Niesent v. Homestake Mining Co. of California

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided September 15, 1993No. 17933, 18009PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

TIMM, Circuit Judge.

Richard Niesent (Niesent) was employed as a miner by Homestake Mining Company of California (Homestake). During his new hire probation period he was injured on the job, filed a worker’s compensation claim, and was discharged. He commenced an action against his former employer claiming 1) that the discharge violated an employment agreement, or 2) that the discharge was wrongful under the public policy exception to the employment at-will doctrine. Summary judgment was entered in favor of Homestake on each cause of action. We affirm summary judgment on the breach of contract…

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. Kelsay v. Motorola, Inc.Illinois Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Order of Railroad Telegraphers v. Railway Express Agency, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
  3. J. I. Case Co. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
  4. Thompson v. St. Regis Paper CompanyWashington Supreme Court · 1984
  5. Wilson v. Great Northern Railway CompanySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1968

30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Jasper v. SmithSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Murray v. St. Michael's CollegeSupreme Court of Vermont · 1995
  3. Sanford v. SanfordSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2005
  4. Bass v. Happy Rest, Inc.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1993
  5. Gary Hicks and Teresa Hicks v. Thomas O'Meara Carolyn A. O'Meara and Murray J. Tobin, D/B/A Big Sky MotelCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1994

29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API