Alexander

Alexander v. Nextel Communications, Inc.

Good Law
1997 Cal. App. LEXIS 130·52 Cal. App. 4th 1376·61 Cal. Rptr. 2d 293·97 Daily Journal DAR 1967·12 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 971
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 25, 1997B099070California2,125 words

Opinion

Opinion

Vogel, J.

Introduction

In this matter, defendants Nextel Communications, Inc., and Kevin Burke appeal from a judgment entered after a jury trial in favor of plaintiff and respondent John Alexander. Because the fundamental issue of whether or not there existed an implied contract that plaintiff’s employment was terminable only for good cause was not submitted to the jury, we find reversible error and remand for a new trial.

Factual and Procedural Background

In 1990, plaintiff John Alexander began working for a mobile communications company called Fleet Call in Oakland, California. Over the next several years, he received regular promotions and eventually relocated to Los Angeles in September 1992. Beginning in 1992, he was approached by defendant Kevin Burke about joining a newly forming division of the company. The company was at that time changing its name to Nextel Communications, Inc. (Nextel). Eventually, plaintiff accepted a new position with Nextel and began working in that capacity in June 1993. Plaintiff contended at trial that he was not given the responsibilities and resultant compensation he had been promised in accepting this new position, and that he was…

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.