---
title: Wrongful Termination Claims
description: An overview of the legal standards and elements for wrongful termination claims in the United States.
keywords: [wrongful termination, employment law, at-will employment, retaliation, discrimination]
category: law
---

## Introduction to Wrongful Termination Claims

Wrongful termination claims are a significant area of employment law in the United States. Under the doctrine of at-will employment, private employers generally have broad discretion to terminate an employee's job for any reason or no reason at all.[^1] However, there are important exceptions to this rule that can give rise to viable wrongful termination claims. These exceptions include termination in violation of public policy, termination based on unlawful discrimination or retaliation, and termination in breach of an employment contract.

## Termination in Violation of Public Policy

One exception to the at-will employment doctrine is when an employee is terminated in a manner that violates an established public policy. Courts have recognized a public policy exception in various contexts, such as when an employee is fired for refusing to commit an unlawful act,[^2] reporting illegal employer conduct,[^3] or exercising a statutory right.[^4] To prevail on a wrongful termination claim based on public policy, the employee must typically demonstrate that (1) a clear public policy exists, (2) the employer's conduct contravened that policy, and (3) the employer's action caused the employee's discharge.[^5]

For example, in Palmateer v. International Harvester Co., the Illinois Supreme Court recognized a public policy exception to at-will employment when an employee was terminated for reporting suspected criminal activity by a co-worker to law enforcement.[^6] The court held that the employee's termination violated the public policy of encouraging citizens to report crimes, and thus the employee had a valid claim for wrongful discharge.

## Termination Based on Unlawful Discrimination or Retaliation

Wrongful termination claims may also arise when an employee is discharged based on unlawful discrimination or retaliation. Federal and state anti-discrimination laws, such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), prohibit employers from terminating employees on the basis of protected characteristics like race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, or disability.[^7] To establish a prima facie case of discriminatory discharge, the employee must show that (1) they are a member of a protected class, (2) they were qualified for the position, (3) they suffered an adverse employment action, and (4) the circumstances give rise to an inference of unlawful discrimination.[^8]

Similarly, federal and state whistleblower protection laws prohibit employers from retaliating against employees who report or refuse to participate in unlawful conduct.[^9] To prevail on a claim of wrongful termination in retaliation, the employee must demonstrate that (1) they engaged in a protected activity, (2) the employer took an adverse employment action against them, and (3) there is a causal connection between the protected activity and the adverse action.[^10]

For instance, in EEOC v. Bojangles Restaurants, Inc., the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals held that an employee who was terminated shortly after reporting sexual harassment had established a prima facie case of retaliatory discharge under Title VII.[^11] The court found that the temporal proximity between the employee's complaint and her termination was sufficient to infer a causal connection, shifting the burden to the employer to provide a legitimate, non-retaliatory reason for the discharge.

## Termination in Breach of an Employment Contract

The final major exception to at-will employment is when an employee is terminated in breach of an express or implied employment contract. While most employment relationships are presumed to be at-will, an employment contract can alter this default rule and require the employer to have "just cause" or a valid reason to terminate the employee.[^12] To prevail on a wrongful termination claim based on breach of contract, the employee must demonstrate the existence of a valid contract and that the employer lacked the necessary cause to terminate the employment relationship.

For example, in Woolley v. Hoffmann-La Roche, Inc., the New Jersey Supreme Court held that an employee handbook can create an implied contract that limits the employer's ability to terminate the employee without good cause.[^13] The court found that the employer's personnel manual, which stated that employees would only be terminated for cause, could be reasonably interpreted as an enforceable contract term that the employer was bound to follow.

## Remedies for Wrongful Termination

Employees who succeed in proving a wrongful termination claim may be entitled to various legal remedies, including reinstatement, back pay, front pay, compensatory damages, and in some cases, punitive damages.[^14] The specific remedies available will depend on the nature of the claim and the applicable statutes or common law. For example, under Title VII, a successful plaintiff may recover back pay, reinstatement or front pay, and compensatory damages for emotional distress, while punitive damages may be available in cases of malicious or reckless conduct.[^15]

It is important to note that the burden of proof for wrongful termination claims can vary depending on the legal theory and the jurisdiction. In some cases, the employee bears the initial burden of establishing a prima facie case, while in others the burden may shift to the employer to demonstrate a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for the termination.[^16] Employees should carefully review the applicable legal standards and procedural requirements when pursuing a wrongful termination claim.

## Conclusion

Wrongful termination claims play a crucial role in protecting employees from unlawful discharge and upholding important public policies. While the at-will employment doctrine provides employers with broad discretion, the exceptions discussed in this document demonstrate the legal limitations on an employer's ability to terminate an employee. By understanding the legal standards, elements, and available remedies for wrongful termination claims, both employees and employers can better navigate this complex area of employment law.

[^1]: Payne v. Western & Atl. R.R. Co., 81 Tenn. 507 (1884).
[^2]: Tameny v. Atl. Richfield Co., 27 Cal. 3d 167 (1980).
[^3]: Palmateer v. Int'l Harvester Co., 85 Ill. 2d 124 (1981).
[^4]: Frampton v. Cent. Ind. Gas Co., 260 Ind. 249 (1973).
[^5]: Geary v. United States Steel Corp., 456 Pa. 171 (1974).
[^6]: Palmateer, 85 Ill. 2d 124.
[^7]: 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a); 29 U.S.C. § 623(a).
[^8]: McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973).
[^9]: 18 U.S.C. § 1514A; N.Y. Lab. Law § 740.
[^10]: Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. White, 548 U.S. 53 (2006).
[^11]: EEOC v. Bojangles Restaurants, Inc., 284 F.3d 505 (4th Cir. 2002).
[^12]: Toussaint v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Mich., 408 Mich. 579 (1980).
[^13]: Woolley v. Hoffmann-La Roche, Inc., 99 N.J. 284 (1985).
[^14]: 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(g); Cal. Lab. Code § 1102.5(c).
[^15]: 42 U.S.C. § 1981a.
[^16]: Tex. Dep't of Cmty. Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248 (1981).