Hentzel

Hentzel v. Singer Co.

Good Law
138 Cal. App. 3d 290·188 Cal. Rptr. 159·1982 Cal. App. LEXIS 2235·115 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 4036·35 A.L.R. 4th 1015
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 20, 1982Civ. 52501California6,810 words

Opinion

Opinion

Grodin, J.

Appellant Paul Hentzel brought this action against his former employer, the Singer Company (Singer), claiming, on the basis of various theories, that his termination from employment was wrongful and in addition that his employer was guilty of the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress. The gist of his complaint is that his employer discriminated against him, and eventually terminated him, in retaliation for his protesting what he considered to be hazardous working conditions caused by other employees smoking in the workplace. He appeals from a judgment dismissing his complaint, after rulings sustaining Singer’s demurrer to each of his causes of action without leave to amend.

In his original complaint, Hentzel alleged four causes of action: the first, in tort, for wrongful dismissal in retaliation “for his attempts to obtain a reasonably smoke-free environment in which to work”; the second, in contract, for breach of an implied promise that he would not be terminated so long as the services he performed were satisfactory; the third, on a theory of estoppel based upon the alleged promise; and the fourth, for intentional infliction of emotional distress. The…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.