Legal Opinion

Hinthorn v. Roland's of Bloomington, Inc.

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided January 29, 1987No. 4-86-0461PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Green

This case concerns the sufficiency of a complaint to state a cause of action for the tort of retaliatory discharge first recognized in this State in Kelsay v. Motorola, Inc. (1978), 74 Ill. 2d 172, 384 N.E.2d 353. The essential requirements for that tort were later described as being “that [an] employer discharge [an] employee in retaliation for the employee’s activities, and that the discharge [was] in contravention of a clearly mandated public policy.” (Palmateer v. International Harvester Co. (1981), 85 Ill. 2d 124, 134, 421 N.E.2d 876, 881.) Here, the dispute between the parties arises…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Kelsay v. Motorola, Inc.Illinois Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Palmateer v. International Harvester Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1981
  3. Barr v. Kelso-Burnett Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1985
  4. Beye v. Bureau of National AffairsCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1984
  5. Scheller v. Health Care Service Corp.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1985

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Hinthorn v. Roland's of Bloomington, Inc.Illinois Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Estate of Strocchia v. City of ChicagoAppellate Court of Illinois · 1996
  3. Grey v. First National BankAppellate Court of Illinois · 1988
  4. Bray v. Stan's Rental, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1990
  5. Daniel v. Village of Hoffman EstatesAppellate Court of Illinois · 1987

4 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