Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)

ROBERT F. O'CONNOR, Appellant, v. EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY, Respondent.

MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

An employer has the right to terminate employment at will at any time and for any reason or no reason, except as that right may have been limited by express agreement with the employee or in a collective bargaining agreement of which the employee is a beneficiary ( Murphy v American Home Prods. Corp., 58 N.Y.2d 293; Weiner v McGraw-Hill, Inc., 57 N.Y.2d 458; Parker v Borock, 5 N.Y.2d 156).

In support of his cause of action for breach of an employment contract, plaintiff does not rely upon any specific representation made to him during the course of his employment interviews, a provision of a collective bargaining agreement or a policy incorporated in a company handbook referred to during the interviews or thereafter adopted which expressly limited defendant's common-law right. Rather he relies upon the popular perception of Kodak as a "womb to tomb" employer and its "Performance Appraisal System" requiring periodic evaluation of each employee. Nothing in that system or in the company handbooks in the record establishes that Kodak promised more than that it would strive to maintain stable employment and to evaluate performance fairly. To the contrary, the "Termination Allowance Plan" expressly stated that if "employment terminates because of discharge," the discharged employee would not qualify for termination allowance. Defendant Kodak was, therefore, properly granted judgment dismissing the first cause of action.

Chief Judge WACHTLER and Judges JASEN, MEYER, SIMONS, KAYE and ALEXANDER concur; Judge TITONE taking no part.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 N.Y.CRR 500.4), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

O'CONNOR v. EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY
(Jun 6, 1985)