South Carolina Lawyers Weekly

Where plaintiff made only internal reports of his employer’s alleged wrongdoing, he cannot show that his firing was a wrongful discharge in violation of public policy. Defendants’ partial motion to dismiss is granted as to plaintiff’s claims of wrongful discharge ...

Tagged with: Wrongful Discharge

A plaintiff claiming that her supervisor defamed her with crude comments at work could not hold their employer vicariously liable for the statements. The comments were outside the scope of employment, and the district court lacked any indication that this ...

Tagged with: employer

Even if plaintiff could establish (1) that defendants knowingly, intentionally, and falsely misclassified plaintiff and numerous other employees as independent contractors in order to avoid payroll taxes, overtime pay and other employment-related expenses and (2) that plaintiff’s injury affects the ...

Tagged with: SCUTPA

Plaintiffs are entitled to an attorney’s fee award as costs pursuant to the parties’ employment contracts, not as damages under the South Carolina Payment of Wages Act. Therefore, plaintiffs were not required to comply with Rule 9(g)’s special-damage pleading provisions. ...

Tagged with: Contract

Even though plaintiff wanted to pass a required qualification by simulation while the defendant-employer wanted him to train directly on plant equipment (which could only be done during the nighttime when plaintiff’s sleep apnea prevented him from working), since defendant ...

Tagged with: ADA

Plaintiff asserts that his co-workers yelled at him, were rude, and made comments about how he was “derelict” in performing his job and that his manager violated company policy by having a conversation about plaintiff’s work performance. These assertions do ...

Tagged with: constructive discharge

An employer’s collective bargaining impasse rights did not override its ERISA obligations as to employees hired post-impasse. The employer nevertheless sought judgment on the pleadings, but did not plead its fraud-dependent affirmative defenses with sufficient particularity. Background Appellant Just Born ...

Tagged with: Rule 9

Where plaintiff is seeking damages for non-physical injuries including “pain and suffering, mental and emotional distress, shock and humiliation, and stress and anxiety” arising out of her termination from defendant’s employ, she is alleging psychological harm. Although she argues that ...

Tagged with: Termination

Plaintiff’s sleep apnea prevented him from working at night, but his job required competence on a machine on which he could only train at night. Although plaintiff’s doctor had agreed to a two-month suspension of plaintiff’s work restrictions, and although ...

Tagged with: ADA

Plaintiff’s complaints that co-workers made rude comments about her hairstyle and excluded her from meetings do not rise to the level of an objectively hostile environment. Since plaintiff cannot satisfy the elements of a hostile environment claim, her hostile-environment constructive ...

Tagged with: Boorish Behavior