Opinion ID: 1688451
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Contractual Employee

Text: Luethans concedes, however, that he was a contractual employee at Washington University. The employment contract governing the relationship between Luethans and Washington University was the annual letter of appointment dated July 3, 1989, which confirmed Luethans' position and salary for the period of July 1, 1989 through June 30, 1990. An essential element to an employment contract is a statement of duration. McCoy v. Spelman Memorial Hosp., 845 S.W.2d 727 (Mo.App.1993). Without a statement of duration, an employment at will is created which is terminable at any time by either party with no liability for breach of contract. Id. at 730. The duration of Luethans' employment contract with Washington University was July 1, 1989 through June 30, 1990. A contractual employee cannot be discharged before the duration of the employment contract except for cause. Fullington v. Ozark Poultry Supply Co., 327 Mo. 1167, 39 S.W.2d 780, 783 (1931). The letter Theodore Cicero, Ph.D., wrote on July 6, 1989 advised Luethans that Washington University may have other projects and assignments for him throughout the duration of their employment contract. In addition, Washington University continued to pay Luethans the salary and annual contribution as promised in the employment contract. Therefore, Luethans' employment with Washington University expired by the terms of his employment contract; Luethans was not discharged from Washington University. Washington University has a right to judgment as a matter of law because Luethans pled his cause of action under wrongful discharge when his employment with Washington University expired under the terms of their employment contract. Luethans has asserted that the failure to renew an employment contract, especially one from year to year, should be treated the same as the discharge of an employee at will. Luethans, however, ignores the significant differences in the relationship. An employer and an employee at will have an indefinite agreement that the employee will work only so long as both parties wish the relationship to continue. Either can end the relationship at any time without cause or liability, so long as the act of discharge is not otherwise wrongful. A contractual employee, however, has a relationship with the employer that is controlled either by express or implied terms. Neither the employee nor the employer can vary those terms without cause or liability may result. Whether there also may exist liability for a wrongful failure to renew a contract or what types of damages may be recovered for a breach of contract in a whistleblower situation are questions that remain open. The pleadings have not pled these issues or provided any factual framework for us to determine what considerations might be involved by way of elements or defenses. Luethans has apparently opted to stand on his wrongful discharge pleadings and we decline to consider whether a separate unpled and as yet unrecognized tort or theory of damages should have been alleged in their place.