The Utah Business and Employment Lawyer

  Utah, like other states, follows the doctrine of at-will employment. Under this doctrine, there is a presumption that all employment relationships are terminable at-will by any party. This development of this doctrine arose from ideas related to freedom of contract and laissez-faire economic principles that were judicially created over time to create a default rule for employment relationships. Stated differently, an at-will employment relationship means that an employer or employee may  terminate an employee the relationship at any time, with or without notice, and with or without cause as long as such termination is not for an unlawful reason . The at-will employment rule is a presumption that may be overcome in several ways, including, for example, through a contract with a specific term (i.e., one year) or through agreements that limit the situations in which an employee may be terminated (i.e., termination for "cause"). Of course, simply because an employee is not ...

In September, 2015 the Utah Supreme Court issued another opinion further clarifying the scope of Utah's judicially created wrongful termination in violation of a clear and substantial public policy claim. We last addressed this claim in August when the Court decided Pang v. International Document Services,  2015 UT 63, where the Court held that a former in-house counsel's complaint did not sufficiently plead a claim for relief for wrongful termination based upon Rule 1.13(b) of the Utah Rules of Professional Conduct - which requires in-house counsel to report suspected unlawful activity to its client - because the Rule did not constitute a clear and substantial public policy (but instead regulates the relationship between a lawyer and his client which the Court somehow found was not a sufficiently clear public interest). In Ray v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.,  2015 UT 83, the Utah Supreme Court answered a certified question from the United States District Court of Utah regarding t...

The Utah Supreme Court issued a decision on August 5, 2015, Pang v. International Document Services , 2015 UT 63, upholding the dismissal of a in-house counsel's complaint alleging that he was terminated for refusing to violate usury laws and the Utah Rules of Professional Conduct. Pang, an at-will employee, asserted that his employer had asked him to violate Rule 1.13(b) of the Utah Rules of Professional Conduct in order to keep his job.  The Court held that his firing did not constitute wrongful termination because it did not violate a clear and substantial public policy of the State of Utah, and even if it did, other rules within the Utah Rules of Professional Conduct evince  strong policy choices that favor of allowing clients to terminate the attorney-client relationship at any time. The Court began its analysis by noting that in Utah the presumption is that all employees are employed at-will and may be terminated for any reason or no reason, with or wi...