Bishop v. Municipality of Anchorage
Alaska Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MOORE, Chief Justice.
I. INTRODUCTION
In this wrongful discharge case, Stanley Bishop appeals the superior court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of his employer on all counts of the complaint. We affirm.
II. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS
Stanley Bishop worked for fourteen years at the Anchorage Telephone Utility (ATU), which is owned by the Municipality of Anchorage. Bishop was known as a “good employee” with an employment record free of disciplinary problems. On July 30, 1990, however, he was terminated for gross insubordination. He filed suit asserting tort, contract, and constitutional…
Also in this document: Dissent.
2Cases cited12 opinions
- United States v. Diebold, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Wheeler v. Caterpillar Tractor Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1985
- Richardson v. Fairbanks North Star BoroughAlaska Supreme Court · 1985
- Newton v. MagillAlaska Supreme Court · 1994
- Nolan v. Sea Airmotive, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 1981
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- D.J. v. P.C.Alaska Supreme Court · 2001
- Fejes v. Alaska Ins. Co., Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 1999
- Osborne v. HurstAlaska Supreme Court · 1997
- 98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1798, 98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3432, 98 Daily Journal D.A.R. 2517, 98 Daily Journal D.A.R. 4738 Sherrie Ace, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee v. Aetna Life Insurance Company, Defendant-Appellee-Cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
- Parks Hiway Enterprises, LLC v. CEM Leasing, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 2000
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.