Alexander v. Nextel Communications, Inc

In Alexander v. Nextel Communications, Inc. (1997) 52 Cal.App.4th 1376, the plaintiff in a wrongful termination case "did not present evidence at trial of an express oral or written agreement specifying the length of his employment or the permissible grounds for termination" nor did he even allege that such an agreement existed. ( Id. at p. 1380.) Therefore, the plaintiff's employment was, as a matter of law, presumptively terminable at will and it was plaintiff's burden at trial to convince the jury that the presumption of at- will employment was rebutted. ( Id. at pp. 1381-1382.) Under those circumstances, the Alexander court held that the jury should have been required to decide, pursuant to the defendant's request, whether there was a valid implied in fact agreement between plaintiff and defendant that plaintiff's employment was terminable only for good cause. ( Id. at p. 1382.) The trial court had refused to instruct the jury regarding the presumption of at-will employment to the jury. (See id. at p. 1380.) After the Court questioned the parties whether the point had been properly raised on appeal, additional briefs were filed, addressing "whether or not defendants had actually requested instructions on at-will employment which were rejected by the trial court, as well as whether or not defendants adequately raised as error on appeal the court's failure to give these instructions." (See id. at p. 1380, fn. 4.) It was shown to our satisfaction that the appellant had requested the instructions and that they were refused. (See id. at p. 1382.)