 | 


Commerce Bank Building 8700 Monrovia, Suite 208 Lenexa, Kansas 66215 Phone: 913-492-6200 Fax: 913-227-0149

|
April 5th, 2011
In the absence of a written employment contract, Kansas employees generally are designated as employees-at-will. The employment at will doctrine provides that the employment relationship can be terminated by either party for any reason or no reason at all. However, the harsh impact of the employment at will doctrine may be limited by an employment contract. Another limitation on the employment at will doctrine is that an employee may not be terminated based on illegal discrimination or for other public policy reasons. Approximate 250,000 employees are unjustly fired from their workplace annually. Victims of wrongful termination may have a right to pursue a wrongful termination lawsuit against their employer.
If your employer has fired you based on unlawful discrimination, violation of an employment contract or against public policy, our Kansas wrongful termination law firm represents employees who are wrongfully terminated in Federal or Kansas administrative hearings seeking relief. Once administrative remedies have been exhausted, we can also help you pursue a lawsuit in Kansas or Federal court depending on the circumstances of your claim.
We have provided a basic overview of some of the grounds that may constitute a basis for a wrongful discharge claim.
When an Employer Violates Kansas State Law of Federal Discrimination Laws
- Discrimination: A number Federal and Kansas statutes prohibit employment policies and decisions based on such factors as race, sex, age, religion, disability, national origin or citizenship. A termination that is based on any of these unlawful grounds may create a basis for pursuing a Kansas claim for wrongful termination or wrongful discharge.
- Whistleblower Protection: There are both Federal and Kansas statutes that provide protection against discharge to employees who report certain illegal, fraudulent or unsafe practice by their employer. Whistleblower protections protect employees against reprisals for reporting these types of illegal or unethical conduct by an employer.
While the law does not necessarily prohibit all terminations of an employee who falls into the above categories, the employer must have a legitimate basis for the termination. Wrongful termination or wrongful discharge cases often involve extensive investigation and analysis of a company’s documents, past records and patterns of hiring and firing as well as a careful analysis and evaluation of the employer’s stated basis for the termination.
When an Employer Violates a Public Policy
In Kansas, an employee may be able to pursue a wrongful discharge claim against a company if the employee’s discharge violates certain public policies. These public policies may be embodied in either Kansas or Federal law.
Below are a list of public policy violations that may constitute grounds for a Kansas wrongful termination claim:
- Termination of an employee for refusing to violate the law.
- Firing an employee for making a worker’s compensation claim.
- Terminating an employee who reports a violation of law by a company when it can or did harm the public.
- Firing an employee for exercising certain statutory or constitutional rights.
- Termination of an employee for responding to a subpoena or participating in a deposition for a civil lawsuit.
- Terminating an employee who insists on compliance with the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.
- Firing an employee for reporting or disclosing suspected criminal activities of a co-worker.
If you are the victim of wrongful discharge for any of the reasons above, you may have the right to file a claim for wrongful discharge against your employer. These cases are extremely complex and have many administrative, procedural and timing requirements. If you have a written employment contract, the requirements for initiating a wrongful termination claim may be impacted by provisions in your employment agreement. If your case is based on discrimination or the statutory protections of a Kansas or Federal law, such as a whistleblower statute, you will likely need to exhaust administrative remedies before pursuing a lawsuit. The time limits for initiating an administrative claim will typically be much shorter than the statute of limitations so it is important that you promptly seek the advice of an experienced Kansas wrongful termination attorney.
Our law firm has a firmly established reputation for providing innovative solutions to legal problems and persuasive advocacy on behalf of our clients. Our law firm has been representing clients in Kansas City and surrounding areas for more than 20 years. Mr. Murrow also lectures nationally at seminars on employment law matters, including sexual harassment, termination procedures, “non-competes” and employment contracts. If you believe that you have been wrongful terminated, call us today for your initial case evaluation at 913-492-6200.
Tags: Kansas Employment at Will, Kansas Wrongful Termination Attorney Posted in Wrongful Termination | Comments Off
April 3rd, 2011
Should you represent yourself in a Kansas court in an auto accident case? While you are certainly permitted to represent yourself in a lawsuit for personal injuries suffered in a Kansas car accident, this does not mean that it is a good idea. It is appropriate to represent yourself in some limited situations like a small claims court case involving minimal property damages and no injuries. One of the main reasons why small claims courts exist is to provide a forum for litigating simple cases with relatively small sums at stake. However, this approach is not appropriate for Kansas auto accident claims involving damages in excess of $4,000.
Virtually any Kansas car accident that involves injuries will involve damages in excess of this nominal sum. If you are involved in a car accident and suffer any injury, you should seek immediate medical attention. It is critical to determine the extent and seriousness of your injuries, which will help you determine how to proceed. If you are diagnosed with any injury that will require treatment beyond minor scratches and bruises, you should seek the advice of an experienced Kansas car accident lawyer.
A layperson who tries to handle his or her own Kansas car accident will find navigating the court system complex as it is governed by formal rules of procedure and evidence that are complicated and confusing. For example, the hearsay rule, which generally bans the use of out of court documents or testimony that quotes a third party for purposes of proving what is asserted, has 23 exceptions under Kansas law. When it comes to the procedural and substantive complexities of navigating civil litigation in a personal injury lawsuit, the insurance company will have an experienced attorney representing its policyholder.
Most laypersons who attempt to handle their own case in a Kansas auto accident lawsuit will have a difficult time even having their case heard on its merits because the insurance company’s attorney will seek to have the case dismissed on a demurrer, motion for summary judgment or some other preliminary procedural motion. Many times the insurance company will be successful despite the merits of your Kansas auto accident claim. The insurance company knows that a layperson is likely to have his or her car accident lawsuit dismissed and will typically not offer any reasonable settlement because it does not fear the possibility of losing and having to pay a more significant judgment.
If you hire an experienced Kansas auto accident lawyer, you level the playing field. A Kansas personal injury attorney will be well versed in what factual evidence is necessary to prevail as well as the procedural and evidentiary requirements for successfully presenting that evidence. Your Kansas car crash attorney will know how to evaluate a proposed settlement offer from the insurance carrier based on prior judgments and settlements in similar cases. The insurance company will also be more inclined to offer a reasonable settlement offer because there is a genuine risk of a substantial jury verdict.
One reason that some Kansas auto accident victims are reluctant to hire an attorney is that they are concerned with the cost of hiring a personal injury attorney. This should never be a concern in a Kansas personal injury lawsuit because virtually all attorneys handle car accident cases on a contingent fee basis. “Contingent” means the payment of any fee is contingent on success. If you do not win, you do not pay any legal fees. If you do win, the Kansas auto accident law firm simply recovers a percentage of the judgment.
It is a good sign if an attorney agrees takes your case on a contingent fee basis because attorneys cannot afford to take bad cases on contingent fee agreements. If you have been involved in a Kansas auto collision resulting in significant property damage or any injuries that require medical care, you should promptly contact a Kansas City car accident lawyer. At the Law Office of Rodney K. Murrow, we have been representing those who suffer catastrophic injuries and wrongful death in car accidents in the greater Kansas City area for over 20 years. We offer a free initial case evaluation so call us today at 913-492-6200.
Tags: Kansas City car accident lawyer, Should I Represent Myself in a Kansas Auto Accident Case Posted in Auto Accidents | Comments Off
March 28th, 2011
When an individual fails to exercise reasonable care to avoid causing emotional injury or intentionally inflicts emotional distress to another, the victim who suffers emotional distress may be able to seek compensation for their injuries. While most states and federal tort law permit a lawsuit based on intentional infliction of emotional distress, many states severely limit the right to recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress. A lawsuit based on the infliction of emotional distress without physical injury generally requires conduct that is extreme and outrageous. When mere insults or trivialities are surpassed, and the conduct of another is regarded as atrocious and beyond the bounds that would normally be accepted by a civilized society, damages may sometimes be available for emotional injury. One such example of inflicting emotional distress would be for someone to falsely inform a husband that his wife had just been killed in a horrendous car accident.
Intentional infliction of emotional distress weighs two factors: (1) The relationship between two or more parties and (2) The susceptibility level of the plaintiff. Infliction of emotional distress is given more weight if the defendant was in a position of authority over the plaintiff, and if the defendant knew the plaintiff would be susceptible and used this knowledge to take advantage and inflict distress in an egregious manner.
A claim of emotional distress may go forward if the following is proven:
- The defendant’s conduct was extreme and outrageous.
- The defendant, through reckless or intentional disregard, caused the plaintiff’s emotional distress.
- It can be proven the plaintiff did indeed suffer emotional distress as a result of the defendant’s reckless disregard.
- The cause of the plaintiff’s emotional distress is directly related to the actions of the defendant.
While virtually all jurisdictions recognize lawsuits based on intentional infliction of emotional distress, many states are far more restrictive when the claim is for negligent infliction of emotional distress. The jurisdiction may require certain specific elements to bring a negligent infliction of emotional distress claim including:
- The emotional distress is a result of physical injury, such as the emotional distress associated with loss of one’s bodily function or disfigurement.
- The person suffers emotional distress from observing a gruesome incident as a bystander.
- The person must be within the “zone of danger” when a close family member is injured so that the plaintiff also could have been injured.
- The action is universally recognized as causing emotional distress, such as misdelivering a death notice or mishandling the corpse of the plaintiff’s love one.
Personal injury that results in intense emotional distress can also be the result of a catastrophic car accident that can leave a victim mentally, physically and emotionally traumatized. Personal injury law may permit an accident victim to file a claim that includes not only economic damages but also non-economic damages like emotional distress. The law generally recognizes emotional distress as a compensable injury. However, the availability of damages for emotional injuries can depend on the type of case and the specific law of your state. It is important to contact an experienced Kansas City personal injury attorney in Kansas or Missouri to obtain legal advice and an assessment of your legal rights.
Your Personal, Professional Team
At a larger law firm, you may feel as though you are just a number among a thousand others. At our friendly and professional law office, we know many critical things—like your name, for starters. At the Law Office of Rodney K. Murrow, we focus on your individual goals to fit your unique circumstances. We prefer this highly personal approach, and we hope that it will suit your needs.
If you have an immediate legal need, please contact Kansas City attorney Rodney K. Murrow’s law office today for a complimentary consultation with an attorney licensed in Kansas and Missouri.
When you need a professional who goes the distance:
The Law Office of Rodney K. Murrow, P.A.
Commerce Bank Building
8700 Monrovia, Suite 208
Lenexa, Kansas 66215
• Phone: 913-492-6200 • Fax: 913-227-0149
A business lawyer & accident injury attorney serving Kansas City, and the surrounding areas of Kansas and Missouri, including but not limited to, Topeka, Lawrence, Independence, Olathe, Overland Park, Liberty, Lee’s Summit, Ottawa, Mound City, Bonner Springs, Atchison, Paola, Emporia, Jefferson City, Salina, Eudora, Columbia, Springfield, Blue Springs, Concordia, Harrisonville, in KS and MO, as well as Wyandotte County, Leavenworth County, Johnson County, Douglas County, Jackson County, Clay County, Franklin County, Miami County, Linn County, Shawnee County, Cass County, Lyon County and Platte County.
Tags: Kansas City personal injury attorney, Personal Injury Claim for Emotional Distress in Kansas City Posted in Personal Injury | Comments Off
March 4th, 2011
Anti-raiding agreements prevent a departing employee from attempting to hire other employees away from the previous employer. This scenario most commonly occurs when the departing employee is starting their own business or accepts employment with a subsequent employer in which they have hiring authority.
Your Personal, Professional Team
At a larger law firm, you may feel as though you are just a number among a thousand others. At our friendly and professional law office, we know many critical things—like your name, for starters. At the Law Office of Rodney K. Murrow, we focus on your individual goals to fit your unique circumstances. We prefer this highly personal approach, and we hope that it will suit your needs.
If you have an immediate legal need, please contact Kansas City business attorney Rodney K. Murrow’s law office today for a complimentary consultation with an attorney licensed in Kansas and Missouri.
When you need a professional who goes the distance:
The Law Office of Rodney K. Murrow, P.A.
Commerce Bank Building
8700 Monrovia, Suite 208
Lenexa, Kansas 66215
Phone: 913-492-6200
A business lawyer attorney serving Kansas City, and the surrounding areas of Kansas and Missouri, including but not limited to, Topeka, Lawrence, Independence, Olathe, Overland Park, Liberty, Lee’s Summit, Ottawa, Mound City, Bonner Springs, Atchison, Paola, Emporia, Jefferson City, Salina, Eudora, Columbia, Springfield, Blue Springs, Concordia, Harrisonville, in KS and MO, as well as Wyandotte County, Leavenworth County, Johnson County, Douglas County, Jackson County, Clay County, Franklin County, Miami County, Linn County, Shawnee County, Cass County, Lyon County and Platte County.
Tags: Kansas City business attorney, Kansas City Business Law Attorney, What is an Anti-Raiding Agreement? Posted in Contracts & Agreements | Comments Off
February 23rd, 2011
There are several primary types of restrictive covenants that companies and small businesses will have an experienced business law tourney draft to protect their interests. One of these restrictive covenants is called a non-compete agreement.
Non-compete agreements prevent the departing employees from using the experience and knowledge learned while on the job from starting their own business in direct competition. A non-compete agreement may also protect a business from the damage caused by departing employees leaving their business to work for competitors, vendors or others generally within a specific geographic region and for a specific time period.
If you have an immediate legal need, please call 913-492-6200 to speak with Kansas City business attorney Rodney K. Murrow’s law office today for a complimentary consultation with an attorney licensed in Kansas and Missouri.
Our business law firm serves Kansas City, and the surrounding areas of Kansas and Missouri, including but not limited to, Topeka, Lawrence, Independence, Olathe, Overland Park, Liberty, Lee’s Summit, Ottawa, Mound City, Bonner Springs, Atchison, Paola, Emporia, Jefferson City, Salina, Eudora, Columbia, Springfield, Blue Springs, Concordia, Harrisonville, in KS and MO, as well as Wyandotte County, Leavenworth County, Johnson County, Douglas County, Jackson County, Clay County, Franklin County, Miami County, Linn County, Shawnee County, Cass County, Lyon County and Platte County.
Tags: Kansas City Business Law Attorney, Kansas City Non-Compete Agreement Attorney Posted in Non-Compete Agreements | Comments Off
February 17th, 2011
Many small business owners opened their business because they had knowledge, skill or perhaps just a keen interest in something and wanted to work for themselves. However, often they quickly learn that there is much more required for running a business than just the knowledge, skill or interest that prompted them to open the business in the first place. How quickly small business owners learn to deal with the legal and business management aspects of running a business can determine whether the business succeeds or fails.
Many years ago in law school, my Corporate Law professor made a comment that has always stuck with me and that I have found to be very true in my 21 years of practicing law. His comment was this:
“If you look at any successful business, you find that they all have on thing in common. The thing they all have in common is that, very early on in their existence, they formed a close relationship with four people: An accountant, a lawyer, a banker and an insurance agent. The reason for that is because it is a problem in one of those four areas that can kill a business just as easily and as often as not making enough money. That’s why large corporations have in-house legal counsel and accounting departments. That’s also why many large corporations self-insure themselves. Small businesses obviously can’t afford to do that, but they can use private attorneys, accountants, insurance agents and banks. And when I say ‘successful business’, you’ll find that this is just as true if the business stayed small or chose to grow. Whether they get that help or choose to try to do it all themselves is often the difference between the business succeeding or failing.”
I have seen my old professor’s statement come true countless times, both for good and bad.
Attorneys help small businesses in the same way that legal departments are used in larger corporations; both help keep the business out of legal trouble. Here are just some of the legal services used by small businesses, in no particular order:
1. Selection and maintenance of a business entity (corporation, partnership, LLC, etc.) as well as helping to draft a business plan, bylaws and operating agreement.
2. Contract drafting or review, including non-compete agreements, vendor contracts, leases, purchase agreements, separation agreements or other types of contracts. It is much cheaper to draft a contract properly to begin with than it is to litigate a poorly drafted contract.
3. Filing, foreclosing and collecting mechanic’s liens and other construction law issues.
4. Commercial or business litigation, whether the business is a plaintiff or a defendant in the lawsuit. This can include breach of contract litigation, suing (or defending a lawsuit) for money owed, business torts (such as interference with contract or business expectation), and obtaining restraining orders preventing further breaches of a contract, enforcing a non-compete agreement or for other reasons.
5. Representing business clients in alternative dispute resolution proceedings such as mediation or arbitration.
6. Representation before public entities such as zoning boards or city councils.
7. Drafting and reviewing employee handbooks for legal compliance and establishing effective employment policies.
8. Representation in various state and federal agencies such as the EPA, state licensing boards, unemployment claims, EEOC, Department of Labor or other entities.
9. Providing cost-effective employment law training to managers, supervisors, HR staff and owners in such areas as sexual harassment, hiring, firing, discrimination, and numerous employment laws.
10. Providing updates regarding changes in the in the law that affect the business which the business might otherwise not know.
11. Insurance coverage disputes.
12. Wage and hour compliance issues under the FLSA and state wage payment laws, including ensuring the correct classification as exempt or nonexempt (sometimes called hourly or salaried) status of employees.
13. Issues unique to not-for-profit corporations.
It usually costs a lot less to prevent a legal problem than it does to fix one after it occurs, and some services can even be handled for flat fees. Just like large corporations consult with their legal departments to prevent or avoid legal problems, so should small businesses with their private attorneys. The key to prevention is not waiting until the crisis occurs. Contacting an attorney for a free initial consultation is essential to discuss what your business might need is far better than waiting until a problem arises.
My goal is first to make sure that your business is protected in order to prevent costly litigation from occurring. If litigation can’t be reasonably avoided, then litigation is pursued aggressively to get the best possible outcome.
Posted in Small Business | Comments Off
January 14th, 2011
Employment discrimination cases are cases where the discrimination is based on the protected classes of race, sex, age, religion, disability, national origin or citizenship, including sexual harassment, racial harassment and other forms of harassment based on those same protected classes. These cases cannot be filed directly in court. They are first required to be filed in one of the appropriate investigative agencies. Under federal law, that agency is the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Under Kansas state law, it is the Kansas Human Rights Commission (KHRC) and under Missouri state law it is the Missouri Commission on Human Rights. The state agencies operate under a “work sharing” agreement through which cases may be dual filed in both the EEOC and the appropriate state agency.
These agencies conduct investigations, including interviewing witnesses and gathering documents. Because information resulting from those investigations can be used later in court, it is strongly advised that any party to an agency proceeding be represented by an attorney, regardless of whether they are the employee or employer. If a party proceeds without legal representation, mistakes can be made in the agency proceeding that may not be able to be fixed later. This could result in the loss of claims or defenses later in court or making a bad decision regarding settlement during the agency proceeding. Employees seeking to file such a claim should consult an attorney before they file their claim.
It is critically important to understand that these agencies are investigative agencies only. They do not have the power to independently issue orders or similar actions like some other government agencies do.. However, in some circumstances they may file suit in court like any other party.
For the purposes of the rest of this discussion, we will focus on the EEOC, which governs federal law.
When a case is filed with the EEOC, it will first be referred to the mediation division. This occurs before any investigation has occurred. A case will proceed to mediation only if both parties agree to mediate. If they do agree, then a specially-trained mediator will be assigned to mediate the case and help the parties attempt to settle or otherwise resolve the case.
Mediation is a process designed to help the parties reach an agreement. A case is settled only by agreement of both of the parties. The mediator has no authority to “make” someone settle a case. A mediator’s job is to help the parties reach that agreement, if possible. If the case settles at mediation, that ends the case.
If the parties don’t agree to mediate, or the case doesn’t settle at mediation if they did agree to mediate, the case proceeds on to investigation. An investigator will be assigned who will interview the parties, request documents and gather the facts. Once the investigation is completed, the investigator will usually issue a finding and close the file. Sometimes the investigator will issue an “administrative closure” which means the agency closes to file without issuing any findings.
Regardless of how the case is closed, the investigator issues a “right to sue” letter. A “right to sue” letter is required to be able to file a lawsuit in state or federal court. It tells the court that you have first been through the agency proceeding as required.
From there, employment discrimination cases proceed as any other case filed in court.
Posted in Employment Discrimination, Sexual Harassment | Comments Off
January 14th, 2011
Small businesses are increasingly using non-compete agreements to reduce the impact of the loss of their greatest assets: employees and the knowledge they possess.
The term non-compete is the common term for several different types of agreements more properly known collectively as restrictive covenants. It is absolutely critical that these agreements be drafted correctly to ensure that they are enforceable.
Properly drafted restrictive covenants can give a small business the ability to obtain an injunction to block a former employee from going to work for a prime competitor, recover attorney fees in the event the employee breaches the agreement and even allow the business to recover damages from the competitor who hires or retains the employee in violation of the agreement. However, poorly drafted or pro forma agreements can, at best, fail to provide adequate protection and, at worst, create additional legal problems for the employer.
Balancing Interests
The law governing restrictive covenants generally attempts to balance two conflicting and competing interests. On one hand, they seek to protect the legitimate business interests of employers in protecting confidential information, which can include everything from customer contacts to pricing and other trade secrets. On the other hand, the law also attempts to balance the legitimate right of employees to take their skills into the marketplace and sell them to the highest bidder. These laws vary from state to state, and differences in state law can be substantial. The law also is evolving as businesses increasingly require certain employees to sign them as a condition of employment.
Proper drafting of restrictive covenants requires careful examination of the facts of the employee’s job duties and the nature of the business or industry. Few types of contracts are more reliant on the specific facts than restrictive covenants. Slight changes in the facts can render the agreement unenforceable in whole or in part. An agreement that may be valid and enforceable in one industry or region may be unenforceable in a different industry in the same region or the same industry but in a different region.
Types of Restrictive Covenants
The primary types of restrictive covenants are non-compete, non-disclosure, non-solicitation and a category that has developed more recently, sometimes referred to as anti-raiding agreements.
- Non-compete agreements prevent the departing employee from starting their own business in direct competition or working for competitors, vendors or others generally within a specific geographic region and for a specific time period.
- Non-disclosure agreements prevent the departing worker from disclosing any confidential information. Non-disclosure agreements generally do not require time or geographic restrictions, or if such provisions are required, they are much broader than those enforceable in non-compete agreements.
- Non-solicitation agreements prevent the departing employee from soliciting customers or business away from the former employer.
- Anti-raiding agreements prevent a departing employee from attempting to hire other employees away from the previous employer. This scenario most commonly occurs when the departing employee is starting their own business or accepts employment with a subsequent employer in which they have hiring authority.
Validity of Contracts
Restrictive covenants cannot, and should not, be drafted in such a way as to act as a restraint on free competition in the marketplace. Courts will apply a number of factors in evaluating the validity of such agreements. Generally recognized protectable interests of the employer include customer contacts and trade secrets. The definition of “trade secret” is far broader and protects much more information than what many small business owners realize, including such areas as pricing.
Because restrictive covenants are actually contracts, the usual requirements for any valid contract apply, including the necessity of valid consideration for imposing the restrictions on the employee. This is easily done when the restrictive covenant is required as a hiring condition because the consideration is the employment itself. Consideration can be a bit trickier when the employer seeks to impose a restrictive covenant on an existing employee.
One final note of caution: because the use of restrictive covenants has become so prevalent in recent years, employers need to be wary of the possibility that an applicant for employment might be covered by such an agreement. If the prospective employer could be considered a competitor under the agreement, hiring the employee in violation of the agreement could expose the prospective employer to damage claims for interference with the agreement.
Posted in Non-Compete Agreements, Small Business | Comments Off
|  |