Opinion ID: 768641
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Wrongful Discharge Issue.

Text: 21 Jarrett was an at-will employee who could be fired at any time, with or without cause. However, Arkansas law recognizes a cause of action for wrongful discharge if an at-will employee is fired in violation of a well-established public policy of the state. Sterling Drug, Inc. v. Oxford, 743 S.W.2d 380, 385 (Ark. 1988). A claim that public policy has been violated will lie if an employer discharges an employee for reporting a violation of state or federal law. Id. at 386. 22 ERC concedes that Jarrett was fired because she reported but could not conclusively prove that her supervisor had manipulated the waiting list for federally subsidized apartments, which is a violation of federal regulations. But ERC argues that Jarrett cannot base a wrongful discharge claim on this public policy violation because she was a participant in the wrongdoing. ERC admits it has no Arkansas authority supporting this contention. In Webb v. HCA Health Servs. of Midwest, Inc., 780 S.W.2d 571, 573-74 (Ark. 1989), the court reversed the grant of summary judgment and ordered trial of a former employee's claim that she had been discharged for reporting that she had been ordered to falsify regulatory compliance documents. The court did not discuss whether, if the employee had participated in falsifying documents, that would preclude the wrongful discharge claim. We conclude the Supreme Court of Arkansas would not hold as a matter of law that an employee's participation in a public policy violation, under duress, precludes a claim for wrongful discharge under the doctrine adopted in Sterling Drug. Thus, Jarrett's claim was properly submitted to the jury, and there is sufficient evidence to support its finding of wrongful discharge. 23