Skip to the main content.
Free Case Review
BLOGS & LEGAL INSIGHTS:
BUSINESS LAW
Hero-Split-Right
CONSUMER LAW

Hero-Split-Left

 

WEBINARS

green lock security thumb

green lock security thumb

 

VIDEO LIBRARY

green lock security thumb

green lock security thumb

 

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

1 min read

Hathaway v. Zoot: Montana Court Upholds Wrongful Discharge Ruling

an old man in business attire sits at a desk in a room filled with boxes in various stages of being packed or unpacked

In Hathaway v. Zoot Enterprises, the Montana Supreme Court addressed claims of wrongful discharge and age discrimination brought by a former employee. The court affirmed summary judgment in favor of the employer, ruling that the employee had failed to exhaust internal grievance procedures before filing suit. Additionally, the court upheld the denial of the employee’s motion to amend the complaint to add an age discrimination claim.

Employer's Justification for Termination

Eric Hathaway was hired by Zoot Enterprises in December 2015 and was terminated in June 2019. Zoot cited Hathaway’s failure to adhere to professional conduct standards and company policies as the reasons for his termination. The company provided Hathaway with a written notice of his termination, along with a packet detailing the company’s grievance procedures. Despite this, Hathaway did not file a grievance before initiating legal action.

In response to the termination, Hathaway filed a lawsuit under Montana’s Wrongful Discharge from Employment Act (WDEA), asserting that his termination was without good cause. Later, he sought to amend his complaint to include an age discrimination claim under the Montana Human Rights Act (MHRA).

Court's Ruling on Procedural and Discrimination Claims

The Montana Supreme Court found that Hathaway had failed to exhaust Zoot’s internal grievance procedures as required by the WDEA. Under the law, employees must first pursue internal appeals before suing, provided the employer has properly notified them of the process. The court determined that Hathaway had received proper notice and a written copy of the grievance procedures but failed to act.

Regarding the age discrimination claim, the court held that Hathaway’s amendment would have been futile. It found that Zoot had provided substantial evidence of nondiscriminatory reasons for the termination, including documented violations of company policies and performance concerns. Hathaway failed to present sufficient evidence to demonstrate that his age was a determining factor in his termination.

Employment Law Guidance

For employees and businesses involved in wrongful termination or workplace discrimination disputes, our labor and employment law team at Whitcomb, Selinsky, PC can provide legal counsel. Contact us to discuss your case and explore your options.