Michael Smyth vs. Pillsbury Company. Essay Example for Free

Michael Smyth vs. Pillsbury Company. EssaySTYLE Michael Smyth vs. Pillsbury Company. romance United States District Court of Pennsylvania.CITATION 914 F. Supp. 97 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 776 131 Lab. Cas. (CCH) P58, 104 11 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 585. ISSUE Can an employer be impeach of violating familiar insurance policy, tortuously invading privacy and subsequently be estopped from firing or discharging an at impart employee, if for the purpose of companys interest, it monitor an employees email communications over the companys email system just to find them contrary to companys interest? FACTS plaintiff, a coach-and-four at defendants company had work email account with access from home. Plaintiff was aware by defendant that email communication is private and confidential with no messages being intercepted and used physical exercise termination.Plaintiff in reliance to promise to its detriment used work email system to trace threatening email comments with supervisor was inte rcepted and employment was terminated. Court ruled in favor of Defendant as it was not evident if termination threatened or violated a clear mandate of public policy or Plaintiffs common law right to privacy. HOLDING An employer cannot be incriminate for violating public policy, privacy and/or discharging an employee according to restatement definition of tort of intrusion upon seclusion. LAW Restatement (Second) of Torts 652B Liability unless attaches when the intrusion is substantial and would be highly offensive to the ordinary. Unless an employee identifies a specific expression of public policy violated by his discharge, it will not be labelled as wrongful and within the area of public policy.EXPLANATION The clear mandate of public policy must strike at the heart of a citizens social right, duties and responsibilities. Plaintiff was not fired for serving on panel duty, for prior conviction or for reporting violation of federal regulations to NRC. Plaintiffs alleged unprofes sional communication over email system utilized by entire company diminishes expectation of privacy. Plaintiff was not asked to disclose personal information by defendant. JUDGEMENT The motion of the defendant to dismiss was granted. The sickness was dismissed with prejudice