Krizan v. Storz Broadcasting Company
1962 La. App. LEXIS 2444, 145 So. 2d 636 (1962)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An employer may not terminate a fixed-term employment contract for cause based on a single instance of tardiness or failure to follow instructions if the employer has previously acquiesced in a policy of laxity, unless the employer first gives clear notice of a change to a stricter policy. Furthermore, an employee's act of disobedience must be willful or insubordinate to constitute just cause for dismissal, considering any mitigating circumstances.
Facts:
- Kenneth Krizan, a radio disc jockey, was employed by Storz Broadcasting Company under a fixed-term employment contract.
- Storz Broadcasting Company had an informal and lax policy regarding punctuality for 'production time,' and announcers were frequently late without being disciplined.
- The radio station was conducting a promotional 'Wak-a-thon,' and managers encouraged employees like Krizan to support the on-air announcer, Holiday, during their off-hours.
- On the morning of March 10, 1960, Krizan responded to a work-related emergency when Holiday collapsed during the Wak-a-thon.
- Krizan voluntarily continued the broadcast until approximately 4:00 A.M. to cover for his collapsed colleague.
- As a result of staying up late for this work-related event, Krizan overslept and was scheduled to report for his own shift at 2:00 P.M. that day.
- Krizan arrived at work 55 minutes late and did not call to notify his employer of his tardiness.
- Upon his arrival, Storz Broadcasting Company immediately terminated Krizan's employment.
Procedural Posture:
- Kenneth Krizan filed suit against Storz Broadcasting Company in a Louisiana trial court, alleging breach of a fixed-term employment contract.
- The trial court found in favor of Krizan and awarded him judgment for $4,350.00, representing the unpaid salary for the remainder of his contract.
- Storz Broadcasting Company, as defendant-appellant, appealed the trial court's judgment to the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit.
- Kenneth Krizan is the plaintiff-appellee in the appeal.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a single instance of an employee's tardiness and failure to report that tardiness constitute sufficient cause to terminate a fixed-term employment contract, where the employer had a history of lax enforcement regarding punctuality and the employee's tardiness was caused by performing unscheduled, voluntary work for the employer's benefit?
Opinions:
Majority - Landry, Judge
No, a single instance of tardiness and failure to report it does not constitute sufficient cause to terminate a fixed-term employment contract under these circumstances. Tardiness is not per se grounds for dismissal; its justification depends on the facts of each case. Here, the employer had a history of laxity regarding punctuality, and to enforce a stricter policy, it must first provide clear notice of the change to its employees, which Storz failed to do. Moreover, Krizan's failure to call was a single, isolated incident, not a willful or insubordinate act, especially given the mitigating circumstance that his tardiness was a direct result of his voluntary, late-night service to the company during the Wak-a-thon emergency. Therefore, the discharge was arbitrary and legally unjustifiable.
Analysis:
This case establishes an important principle in employment law concerning 'for cause' terminations under fixed-term contracts. It holds that an employer's past acquiescence in certain employee behavior, such as tardiness, effectively waives their right to summarily dismiss an employee for that behavior without first providing clear notice of a policy change. The decision emphasizes a fact-sensitive, contextual analysis of employee 'disobedience,' requiring a showing of willfulness or insubordination rather than a single, justified mistake. This precedent protects employees from arbitrary dismissals based on minor infractions that the employer had previously tolerated, reinforcing the stability and protections intended by fixed-term contracts.
