Newcorp V. Grey Case Summary

484 Words2 Pages
Based on the legal encounter, it seems as if the unsatisfactory performance/corrective action plan was not followed in this case. Pat was not put on a corrective action plan and he was not explained what things were not working out. We are unaware of his job performance since he was not put on a corrective action plan and it seems as if his job performance was not mentioned during his termination meeting with his supervisor. Due to Pat being an at-will employee, he can be terminated at any time for any legal reason. If NewCorp is stating that his job performance was unsatisfactory, it must be documented. He should have been placed on a corrective action plan as stated by company policy in order to give him time to improve his performance to a satisfactory level in a specified time period. If his performance did not improve, then he could be terminated. Pat may have a case under the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 based on the decision regarding his dismissal. It was wrongful…show more content…
Therefore, there is a situation of Undisclosed Principal, where an agent acts without disclosing either the existence of a principal or the principal’s identity and the agent is directly liable to the third party. If Newcorp’s senior management is concerned over his public display of his personal views as a basis for his termination the judgment is erroneous. However, there might have been some apprehension over the agency relationship to third parties because principals have both contractual and tort liability for certain acts of their agents (Jennings, 2006). The contract liability of a principal is not only determined by either what he intended or by the limitations agreed to privately by the agent and the principal, but also the third parties have certain contract enforcement rights depending on the nature of the agent’s work and the authority given

More about Newcorp V. Grey Case Summary

Open Document