Summary
The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment for Delaware State University on Stephanie Smith’s claims under the Delaware Whistleblowers’ Protection Act, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and defamation. The Court held that constructive discharge can support a Whistleblower Act claim, but Smith presented insufficient and inconsistent evidence that she was constructively discharged because of her reports. The Court also held that New York law governed the defamation claim and that the claim was barred by New York’s one-year statute of limitations.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether a constructive discharge can support a claim under the Delaware Whistleblowers' Protection Act.
- Whether Smith presented sufficient evidence that she was constructively discharged because she reported a statutory violation.
- Whether the question of whether proof of damages was required for Smith's defamation claim was preserved for appellate review or should be considered under the plain-error or interests-of-justice exceptions.
- Whether New York law governed the defamation claim and barred it under New York's one-year statute of limitations.
Holdings
- An employee who is constructively discharged may pursue a claim under the Delaware Whistleblowers' Protection Act on the same basis as an employee who was formally discharged.
- Smith failed to present evidence from which a rational trier of fact could find that she was constructively discharged because she reported the alleged firearm-certification violation; summary judgment for DSU was proper.
- The issue whether proof of causation and damages was required to state Smith's defamation claim was not fairly presented below or in Smith's opening appellate brief, and the interests of justice did not require review.
- New York law governed the defamation claim because the allegedly defamatory employment reference was published in New York, and New York's one-year statute of limitations barred the claim filed more than one year after publication.
Key quotations
“We hold that an employee who is constructively discharged can pursue a claim under the Whistleblower Act, on the same basis as if she had been formally discharged.” (at 477)
“To prevail, the employee must show “working conditions so intolerable that a reasonable person would have felt compelled to resign.”” (at 477)
“Accordingly, New York’s statute of limitations controls.” (at 480)
Factual background
Smith was a manager in Delaware State University's Department of Public Safety. She reported that Captain Belinda Baker had been permitted to receive and carry a handgun before obtaining required police certification, and she alleged that her working relationship with her supervisors deteriorated afterward. Smith resigned after alleging that her supervisor threatened to make her life hell or miserable, although her later statements and conduct were inconsistent with attributing her resignation to the firearm-reporting incident. DSU later gave the New York City Department of Corrections an erroneous employment reference stating that Smith had been disciplined, allegedly delaying her employment.
Procedural history
Smith sued DSU in the Delaware Superior Court after DSU allegedly issued an erroneous employment reference stating that she had been disciplined. The Superior Court granted DSU summary judgment on all three claims and denied Smith's motion for reargument. The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed.