F ILED

J a nua ry 17, 1996

C e c il C ro w s o n , J r.

A p p e lla t e C o u rt C le rk

IN THE C O U RT OF A PPEA L S OF TEN N E S S E E

W E S T E R N SE C T IO N AT J ACK S O N

 

B L A KE W E B ER, )

)

P la inti f f /A ppe lla nt, ) S h e lb y Chan c e ry No . 103274-3

R .D .

)

VS. ) A ppe a l N o . 02A 01-9407-C H -00173

)

)

J A C K M O S E S , Indiv idua lly a n d )

J EFFERS O N PILOT LIFE IN S . C O ., )

)

D e fe n d a n t s /A p p e llees. )

A PPEA L FROM THE CHA N C ERY C O U RT OF SHELBY C O U N T Y

A T MEMPHIS , TENN E S S E E

THE HON ORA BLE D. J . A L IS S A N D R A TOS , C H A N C ELLOR

G A IL O. MA THES

Memph is , Ten n essee

A ttorn e y f o r P la intif f /A ppe lla n t

R IC H A R D H. A LLEN , J R .

A L L E N , SCR UGGS, SO SSAM A N

& THOMPS O N , P.C .

Memph is , Ten n essee

A ttorn e y f o r De fe nda nts/A ppe lle e s

A FFIRMED

A L AN E . H IG H E R S , J U D G E

HEW ITT P. TOMLIN , J R ., S R . J . (C o n c u rs )
2

W . FRAN K CRA W FORD, P.J ., W .S . (D issen ts - see sep a ra t e d issen t in g

opin ion)

P la in t if f -A ppe lla n t B la k e W e b e r b roug h t s u it again s t the De fe nda nts -

A ppe lle e s , J a c k Mos e s a nd J e f fe rs on Pi lot Li fe In s u ra n c e C o m p a n y

(" J e f fe rs o n Pilo t "), allegin g t h a t h e w a s unla w f u lly dis c h a rg e d due to his

re f u sal to part i c ip a t e in A p p e llee J e f fe rs o n Pilo t 's illegal em p lo yment

p ract ices. T h e c h a n c e llo r dis m is s e d A ppe lla nt's s u it , s tati n g that his

cau s e of a c t ion w a s ba rre d by the a pplic a b le on e y e a r s tatute of

lim it a t io n s . W e b e r ap p eals the l o w e r c ourt 's dis m is s a l of his C o m p la int.

A t the he a rin g be f o re the ch a n c e llo r, the pa rt ie s s t ipula ted to the

f o llo w in g fact s . A p p e lla n t w as verb a lly n o t if ie d b y App e llee J ack Mo ses

o n A u g u s t 5 , 1992, t h a t A p p e lla n t 's sales manager co n t ract w it h

J e f fe rs o n P ilot w oul d be te rm in a t e d a t th e en d o f A u g u s t , 1992.

A ppe lla n t there a f ter re que s ted i n w rit in g that J e f fe rs on Pi lot re c onsi d e r

it s de c is ion to term in a te him . A p p e lla n t 's sale s m a n ager co n t ract w it h

J e f fe rs o n P ilo t pro v id e d , in pert in e nt part : "this c ontra c t m a y be

t e rm in a t e d o n w rit t e n n o t ic e b y e it h e r p a rt y ...." A p p e l la n t received

w ri tte n notif ic a t ion of his term in a t ion after A u g u s t 31, 1992. A ppe lla n t

f ile d the pre s e nt sui t f o r re tal ia tory dis c h a rg e on A u g u s t 31, 1993.

A ppe lla nt's Co m p la i nt a s s e rt s tha t A ppe lla nt w a s te rm in a t e d
3

b ecau s e he re f u s e d to com p ly w ith J e f fe rs on P ilot's a lle g e d c o m p a n y

polic y of not hirin g or re c o m m e ndin g f o r em p lo y m e n t an y b lack fe m a les.

T h is allegat io n , if tru e , c ons t itute s a v io la t ion of the T e nne s s e e H u m a n

R ig hts A c t (" A c t "), T .C .A . § 4-21-401 (1991). A ppe lla n t seek s re lie f

purs u a nt to § 4-21-301 (1991) of the A c t , w h ic h s t a t e s :

I t s h a ll be a dis c rim in a tory pra c t ic e f o r a pe rs o n or f o r tw o (2 )

o r m o re p e rs o n s :

(1 ) to re t a lia t e o r d iscrim in a t e in an y mann e r

agai n s t a pe rs on b ecau se h e o r sh e h as o p p o sed

a p ract ic e d ecla re d dis c rim in a tory by this c h a pte r.

. .

A ppe lla n t als o assert s a cla im f o r re lie f u n d e r the P ublic P rote c t ion A c t ,

w h ic h p ro v id es:

(a ) N o em p lo yee s h a ll be dis c h a rg e d or term in a ted s o le ly fo r

re f u s in g to part ic ip a te i n , or f o r re f u s in g to re m a in s ile n t

a b o u t illegal act iv it ies.

(b ) A s u sed in t h is sect io n , "illegal act iv it ies" m ean s act iv it ie s

w h ic h a re in vi o la t ion of the c rim in a l o r c iv il c o d e o f t h is st a t e

o r the U n i t e d S t a t e s or a n y re g u la t ion i nte nde d to protec t the

p u b lic h ealt h , safe t y o r w e lfa re .

T .C .A . § 50-1 -304 (1991).

T h e a pplic a b le s tatute of lim itati ons fo r cla im s f ile d p u rs u a n t t o t h e

A c t an d f o r cla im s allegin g t h e t o rt o f re tal ia tory dis c h a rg e is one year.

S e e T .C .A . § 4-21-311 (1991 & S upp. 1994) a nd T. C .A . § 28-3 -104 (1980 &

S upp. 1994), re s p e c t iv e ly . A ppe lla nt al le g e s that his e m p lo y m e n t

c ontra c t re quire d w ritte n noti f ic a t ion of term in a t io n in ord e r f o r

term in a t io n t o b e ef fect ive. Th u s , A ppe lla nt cla im s that his term in a t io n

w a s not unequiv o c a l, a nd the s t a tute of lim itati ons di d not beg in to run,

unti l h e received w rit t e n notic e , w h ic h oc c u rre d s o m e tim e a f t e r A u g u s t
4

31, 1992.

A ppe lle e s a rg u e , on the othe r ha nd, that W e b e r knew his

e m p lo yment w as t e rm in a ted on A u g u s t 5, 1992. In support of their

a rg u m e n t , A p p e llees cit e t o W e b e r's le tter a ddre s s e d to Pa t W a ld e n ,

Regio n a l V ic e P re s id e nt of J e f fe rs on Pi lot, da ted A u g u s t 5, 1992. T h e

le tte r s tate s , "I w ould lik e y ou to re c onsi d e r y our de c is ion to t e rm in a t e

m y S a les Man ager co n t ract , b ecau se I feel t h a t I ha v e m u c h to a dd to th e

M e m phis A gen cy an d J e f fe rs o n Pilo t as a S a le s Man ager." Th e A p p e llees

a ls o c la im that i t is e v id e nt fro m A ppe lla nt's C o m p la int that A ppe lla n t

kne w the A u g u s t 5, 1992 de c is ion to t e rm i n a t e h im w as f in a l. Th e

C o m p la i n t a lle g e s that, a f ter W e b e r s e nt the le tter to Mr. W a ld e n , but

b e f o re A u g u s t 31, 1992, " P la inti f f a g a in pre s s e d Defenda n t M o s e s a s to

w h y the te rm in a t ion w a s oc c u rrin g . Defenda n t Mos e s s a id , 'b e c a u s e of

the w hole s ituati on.'" B a s e d on the s e s t a t e m e nts m a d e by A ppe lla nt,

A ppe lle e s c onc lude tha t the s t a tute of lim it a t ions be g a n to r un no la t e r

than A u g u s t 5, 1992.

W e pe rc e iv e the only is s u e be f o re this C ourt to be w h e ther, in a

re t a lia t o ry dis c h a rg e c a s e , the s tatute of li m i t a t io n s accru a l p e rio d

b egin s to run w h e n the em p lo yee is in f o rm e d o f h is im m in e nt term in a t ion,

o r w h e n that te rm in a t ion ac tual ly oc c u rs .

I n W e b s ter v . T e nne s s e e B o a rd of R e g e nts , 902 S .W . 2d 412 (T e nn.

A pp. 1995), the m id d le sect io n of this c ourt cons id e re d the poi nt at w h ic h

the s t a tute of lim itati ons be g in s to run " w h e n a n em p lo yee is given n o t ic e
5

o f his pe ndin g dis c h a rg e (due to al le g e d dis c rim in a t ion b ased o n race)

but c ontinue s to perf o rm non-g ra tuitous s e rv ic e s until the fin a l da y of

w o rk purs u a nt to s a id notic e ." I d . at 4 1 4 . Th e fa c ts of W e b s t e r are

m a rk e d ly s im ila r to the fact s in t h e case at b a r. In W e b s t e r, t h e p la in t iffe m p lo yee, w h o served as t h e D ire c tor of A c c ountin g a nd Fi n a n c e a t

Ten n essee S tate U n iv e rs ity fro m 1990 until his term in a t ion on S e ptem b e r

3 , 1991, a lle g e d t h a t h e w as d isch a rged b ecau se o f h is Af rican -A m e rican

race. I d . a t 413. A lthoug h the de fe nda nts notif ie d p la intif f that his

e m p lo yment w ould be te rm in a t e d on S e pte m b e r 3, 1991, the de fe nda nts

told pla inti f f tha t his te rm in a t ion w oul d not be e f fe c t iv e until S e ptem b e r

30, 1991. I d . T h e pla intif f f ile d his orig in a l c o m p la int on S e ptem b e r 28,

1992, ove r one y e a r a f ter pla intif f w a s notif ie d of his im p e ndin g

term in a t ion, but le s s than one y ear a f ter the e f fe c t iv e da te of

term in a t ion. I d . R e ly in g on the de c is io n of the S upre m e C ourt in D e la w a re

S t a t e C o llege v. R ic k s , 449 U .S . 250, 258, the c ourt f ound tha t the s t a tute

o f lim itati ons i n a n e m p lo y m e nt dis c rim in a t io n s u it beg in s to run on the

d a t e that the a lle g e d dis c rim in a t ion occ u rs ; that is , the da te the

e m p lo yee is notif ie d of his im p e ndin g term in a t ion. I d . a t 414. Quoti n g

f ro m R ic k s , the c ourt sta ted:

T h e o n ly a lle g e d dis c rim in a t ion occ u rre d --a nd the filin g

lim it a t io n s pe riods the re f o re c o m m e n c e d --a t the tim e the

tenure de c is ion w a s m a d e an d co m m u n icat e d t o [p la in t if f]. .

. .M e re c ontinuity of em p lo y m e nt, w ithout m o re , is in s u f f ic ie n t

t o pro long the l ife of a c a u s e of a c t ion f o r e m p lo y m e n t

d is c rim in a t ion.

I d .

A lthough the dis c rim in a tory act R ic k s in v o lv e d a de n ia l of tenure ,

ra ther than a t e rm in a t io n o f em p lo yment , t h e Sup re m e C o u rt m a d e clear
6

in C h a rdon v. Fern a n d e z , 454 U .S . 6 (1981), that the ra t iona le e m p lo y e d

in R ic k s w as als o ap p licab le t o cases in v o l v i n g term in a t ion of

e m p lo yment . In C h a rdon , t h e re s pondents w e re nontenure d

a d m in is t ra tors in Pu e rt o R ic o 's De p a rt m e nt of E duc a t ion. On J une 18,

1977, e a c h re s pondent w a s notif ie d by le tter that his a ppointm e nt w ould

t e rm i n a t e a t a s p e c if ic da te be t w e e n J une 30 and A u g u s t 8, 1977. N o

c o m p la in t w a s f ile d until J une 19, 1978. In hold in g that the a pplic a b le

one y e a r s tatute of lim itati ons ba rre d the re s pondents ' c a u s e of a c t ion,

the C ourt sta ted:

I n R ic k s , w e he ld that the prope r f o c u s is on the tim e of the

d iscrim in a t o ry a c t , not the point at w h ic h the c o n seq u e n ces

o f t h e ac t be c o m e pain f u l . 449 U .S ., a t 258. T h e fa c t of

term in a t io n is n o t it self a n ille g a l act . In R ic k s , t h e alleged

ille g a l a c t w a s ra c ia l dis c rim in a t io n in the te nure de c is ion. I d .,

a t 259. H e re , re s ponde nts a lle g e tha t the de c is ion to

t e rm in a t e w a s m a d e s o le ly f o r polit ic a l re a s ons, v io la t ive o f

F irs t A m e n d m e n t rig h t s . Th e re w e re n o o t h e r allegat io n s ,

e ither in R ic k s o r in t h ese cases , o f illegal act s su b seq u e n t t o

the da t e on w h ic h the de c is ions to te rm in a t e w e re m a d e . . .

.In t h e cases at b a r, resp o n d e n t s w e re n o t if ie d , w h e n t h e y

received their le tters , that a f in a l de c is ion had be e n m a d e to

t e rm in a t e th e ir a ppointm e nts. T h e fa c t that the y w e re

a ffo rd e d reas ona b le notic e c a nnot ex tend the pe riod w ithin

w h ic h sui t m u s t be file d .

T h e A ppe lla nt in the pre s e n t c a s e does not cla im that he w a s

d iscrim in a t e d a g a in s t ; ra ther, he a s s e rts a c a u s e of a c t io n f o r re t a lia t o ry

d isch a rge. It is w e ll s e ttle d tha t a n e m p l o yer in Ten n essee may

t e rm in a t e t h e e m p l o y m e n t re la t ionshi p w ith or w ithout good c a u s e .

P a y n e v. Th e W est e rn & A . Railro a d , 8 1 Ten n . 5 0 7 , 5 1 7 (1 8 8 4 ). Ho w ever,

our c ourts ha v e re c o g n iz e d e x c e ptions to the e m p l o y m e nt a t w ill

doc t rin e . In C la nton v. C a in -S lo a n Co . , 677 S .W . 2d 441 (T e nn. 1984), the

Ten n essee S upre m e C ourt f irs t re c o g n iz e d a c a u s e of a c t ion f o r
7

re t a lia t o ry dis c h a rg e in ord e r to pre v e n t em p lo yers fro m c irc u m v e ntin g

their oblig a t ions under the w o rk e rs ' c o m p e n s a t ion la w s . S in c e C la nton

w a s de c id e d , tort a c t ions f o r re t a lia t o ry d isch a rge h ave b een exp a n d e d

t o in c lude a v a rie ty of si tuati ons w h e re a n e m p lo y e r's a c t ions c le a rly

v io la t e st a t u t o ry p o licy. S ee gen e ra lly A nde rs on v. S tand a rd Regis t e r

C o ., 857 S .W . 2d 555, 556 (T e nn. 1993). S p ecif ically , t h e A nde rs o n c ourt

reco g n iz e d t h a t "a n em p lo yer can n o t d isch a rge emplo yee s . . .b ecau s e

they re f u s e to part ic ip a te i n or be s ile n t a bout ille g a l a c t iv ity a t the w o rk

p lace. (T .C .A . § 50-1 -304 (1991))." I d . a t 556. In R e y nold s v . O z a rk Motor

L in es, In c ., 8 8 7 S .W . 2 d 8 2 2 (T e n n . 1994), the c ourt f ound the f o llo w in g

t o b e ele m e n t s o f a cau se o f act io n f o r re t a lia t o ry d isch a rge: "a n

e m p l o y m e n t a t -w ill re la t ionshi p ; a c le a r de c la ra t ion of public po lic y

w h ic h im pose s dutie s upon the em p lo yee o r em p lo yer; an d d isch a rg e of

t h e e m p lo y e e fo r re f u s in g t o v io la t e t h o s e d u t ie s ." I d . a t 825. 

T h e e le m e nts of a re tal ia tory dis c h a rg e c la im a re pre s e nt in the

case a t bar. A s this c ourt sta ted i n R a ndolph v. Dom in ion Ba n k , 826 S.W .

2 d 477 (T e nn. A pp. 1991 ), "a c ontra c t f o r e m p l o y m e nt f o r a n i nde f in i t e

t e rm is a co n t ract at w ill. . ." W e b e r's emplo yment co n t ract , as reveale d

in the re c o rd , w a s f o r a n inde f in ite pe riod and pe rm itted him to " b e

t e rm in a t e d on w ritte n no t ice b y eit h e r p a rt y ." Th e allegat io n s o f

A ppe lla nt's C o m p la int, if tru e , c onsti tute a v io la t ion of a c le a r s tatutory

p o licy. S e e T .C .A . § 4 -2 1 -4 0 1 , § 5 0 -1 -3 0 4 . Fin a lly , t h e C o m p la in t alleges

that A p p e lla nt w a s term in a ted for re f u s in g to part ic ip a te i n the A ppe llees '

d is c rim in a tory em p lo y m e n t p ract ices. T h e c ru x of this s u i t , h o w ever, is

not w h e t h e r t h e re is a c a u s e o f a c t io n , b u t w h e n t h e c a u s e o f a c t i o n
8

accru e d .

A lthough W e b s t e r in v o lved allegat io n s o f e m p lo y m e n t

d is c rim in a t ion, an d t h e p resen t case ass e rt s a c l a im f o r re t a lia t o ry

d isch a rge, w e f ind that the ra t iona le utiliz e d in W e b s t e r i s e qua lly

a p p licab le to the c a s e a t b a r. B o t h A p p e lla n t a n d t h e p la in t iff in W e b s t e r

a lleged w rong f u l dis c h a rg e ; the form e r on the ba s is of ra c ia l

d is c rim in a t ion, the la tter f o r re t a lia t io n in vi o la t ion of c le a r s tate polic y .

A s the W e b s t e r c ourt sta ted, a n e m p lo y e e w ho bel ie v e s he is be in g

t e rm in a t e d b ecau se o f h is race su f fe rs t h e alleged d iscrim in a t io n on the

d a t e the dis c rim in a tory a c t occ u rs ; that is , w h e n the e m p lo y e e is

in f o rm e d of the im p e ndin g term in a t ion. T h e e m p lo y e e 's c a u s e of a c t ion,

f o r purpose s of the s tatute of lim itati ons, a c c ru e s on that da y . W e b s t e r,

902 S .W . 2 d at 414. S im ila rly , in a s u it al le g in g re tal ia tory dis c h a rg e , the

e m p lo yee s u f fe rs the a lle g e d re t a lia t ion on the da t e he is in f o rm e d of the

upc o m in g t e rm in a t io n . Th e exis t e n ce o f a n e m p lo y m e nt contra c t in the

p re s e n t c a s e , re quirin g w ritte n notic e of term in a t ion, does not affe c t our

a n a lysis . Th e p a rt ies st ip u la t e d tha t A ppe lla nt w a s v e rb a lly notif ie d by

A ppe lle e J ack Mo ses o n A u g u s t 5, 1992, t h a t A p p e lla n t 's sales manager

c ontra c t w ith J e f fe rs on P ilot w ould be te rm in a ted on A u g u s t 31, 1992.

Regard less of the fa c t that A ppe lla nt did not re c e iv e w ritten notic e of his

term in a t io n unti l a f t e r t h a t date , the re tal ia tory a c t occ u rre d w h e n

A ppe lle e Mos e s in f o rm e d A ppe lla nt of his im p e ndin g term in a t ion.

F o r t h ese reaso n s , w e h o ld that A ppe lla nt's c a u s e of act io n accru e d

n o la t e r tha n A u g u s t 5, 1992; the da t e A p p e lla nt w a s told of the
9

im p e ndin g te rm in a t ion, a nd not on A u g u s t 31, the da t e A ppe lla nt's

t e rm in a t io n b ecame ef fect ive.

A c c o rd in g ly , w e af f irm the de c is ion of the c h a n c e llo r. C o s t s a re

t a x e d to the A ppe lla nt.

 

 

 H IG HERS, J .

 

TOMLIN , S R . J . (C o n c u rs )

 

C R A W FORD , P.J ., W .S . (D issen t s )

(S e e s e p a ra te Dis s e ntin g O p in ion)