Legal Opinion
Day & Zimmermann, Inc. v. Hatridge
Court of Appeals of Texas
Decided May 12, 1992No. 6-91-077-CVPublishedCited by 39 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
GRANT, Justice.
Day & Zimmermann, Inc. appeals from a judgment in favor of Ben Hatridge in a wrongful discharge case.
Day & Zimmermann contends that the trial court lacked jurisdiction over the case because the events occurred on a federal enclave; that the cause of action was preempted by the Labor-Management Relations Act; that Hatridge’s implied employment contract was unenforceable because it was not in writing; and that Ha-tridge did not establish a cause of action for wrongful discharge because he was employed on an at-will basis.
Day & Zimmermann also contends the trial court erred…
2Cases cited41 opinions
- Ingersoll-Rand Co. v. McClendonSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Arnold v. National County Mutual Fire Insurance Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1987
- Schroeder v. Texas Iron Works, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1991
- Roark v. STALLWORTH OIL AND GAS, INCTexas Supreme Court · 1991
- International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers v. HechlerSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by39 opinions
- Federal Express Corp. v. DutschmannTexas Supreme Court · 1993
- MacKey v. U.P. Enterprises, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 12th District (Tyler)1996
- Amador v. Tan, Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)1993
- Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co. v. Portilla, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District1992
- Gamble v. Gregg County, Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)1996
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.