Court Opinion

ID: 9456734
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 20:01:12.790075+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:35:05.298824
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM:
We affirm on the opinion of Judge Blumenfeld in the district court. 322 F.Supp. 619 (D.Conn.1970).
It should be emphasized, as stated in the opinion, that the defendants’ action violated no contractual obligation. Defendants, unlike the employees in Sperry Rand Corp. v. Rothlein, 241 F.Supp. 549, 554, 559 (D.Conn.1964), did not have employment contracts. To impose liability upon the defendants for failure to notify their employer before terminating their employment would, in effect, grant to their employer protection for which it was unwilling to bargain.