Opinion ID: 2135181
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: sufficiency of the evidence

Text: An at-will employee may generally not recover damages for a discharge, but when the discharge occurs for reasons contrary to public policy we have recognized an exception. In Springer v. Weeks & Leo Co., 475 N.W.2d 630, 632 (Iowa 1991) ( Springer II ), for example, we recognized a right of action for a discharge in retaliation for an employee's filing a workers' compensation claim. K-Products contends that the evidence was insufficient on both the retaliation claim and the plaintiff's damages. The plaintiff submitted evidence of tardy payment of workers' compensation benefits by K-Products, disparaging comments by company officials concerning claims for workers' compensation, and the testimony of several employees that they had been harassed following their filing of workers' compensation claims. Also, evidence that K-Products gave inconsistent reasons for her discharge supported the plaintiff's theory, and there was testimony by the company's doctor that he believed the company was intentionally slowing things down in processing workers' compensation claims. As to the sufficiency of the evidence on damages, there was testimony that the plaintiff was depressed and even attempted suicide following her termination. She had applied for other jobs but was denied employment, presumably because she had been fired at K-Products. We believe that the evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, is sufficient to generate fact issues on the question of retaliation, proximate cause, and damages.