Legal Opinion

Scott v. BURLINGTON MILLS CORPORATION

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 28, 1956No. 594PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PeR Cueiam.

The complaint nowhere alleges that the discharge was in breach of any contract of employment. Without such contract, a discharge is not wrongful. No cause of action has been stated because of the termination of the employment. May v. Power Co., 216 N.C. 439, 5 S.E. 2d 308; Howell v. Credit Corp., 238 N.C. 442, 78 S.E. 2d 146. As only one cause of action is alleged, the judgment sustaining the demurrer is

Reversed.

JohnsoN, J., not sitting. DeNNY, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Howell v. Commercial Credit Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  2. May v. Tidewater Power Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1939

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Coman v. Thomas Manufacturing Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1988
  2. George v. Wake County Opportunities, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1975
  3. Coman v. Thomas Manufacturing Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1988
  4. Smith v. Ford Motor CompanyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1975