Keep up your informative writing. It is very interesting and informative.

Francis

Your comment pretty much proves the points above. it will be hard for the Browns to win this case if it goes before an arbiter. Therefore, they will likely settle.

I just wanted to chime in. As a practicing attorney in Labor Law, I wish to underline how difficulty it is for an employer to prove that someone was fired “with cause” when the industry usually does not resort to such firings, as a general rule. A with cause firing is usually used for an egregious violation of a contractual duty. Gross misconduct, absenteeism, belligerence are the crriteria that have been accepted by most courts as benchmarks for a with cause firing.

Good work with the article, very informative.

Thanks for the compliment. No I’m not an attorney. I am a third year law student at Widener University. I agree with both of you. The case does hinge on the definition of “cause.” Generally it is a broad definition so I believe the Browns may have some argument. However, I have not read the contract. What I do know is that Kokinis is not an at-will employee, so I think a minor infraction wouldn’t necessary make him eligible for termination. And based on what I have read, there is no indication anything major occurred.

But like you both said, I think this case will be settled because I can’t see how the Browns can believe it would be more cost-effective to litigate.

With that said, I agree with Darren. Settlement.