CompFox AI Summary
Olive D. Griggs, a manager for Coca-Cola Employees’ Credit Union since 1974, alleged she was retaliatorily discharged for reporting illegal activities related to irregularities in the Credit Union's computer system conversion. Griggs filed suit under the Tennessee Public Protection Act, Tenn.Code Ann. § 50-1-304. The Credit Union moved for summary judgment, arguing Griggs could not meet the elements of a retaliatory discharge claim. The Court, presided over by District Judge Collier, granted summary judgment to the Credit Union on the statutory claim, finding Griggs could not demonstrate an exclusive causal relationship between her reporting activities and her termination, nor a contemporaneous fear of dismissal. The Court reserved ruling on whether a concurrent common law cause of action for retaliatory discharge exists, inviting further briefing.
Griggs v. Coca-Cola Employees' Credit Union is a workers' compensation case decided in District Court, E.D. Tennessee. This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.
It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in District Court, E.D. Tennessee.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
Olive D. Griggs, a manager for Coca-Cola Employees’ Credit Union since 1974, alleged she was retaliatorily discharged for reporting illegal activities related to irregularities in the Credit Union's computer system conversion. Griggs filed suit under the Tennessee Public Protection Act, Tenn.Code Ann. § 50-1-304. The Credit Union moved for summary judgment, arguing Griggs could not meet the elements of a retaliatory discharge claim. The Court, presided over by District Judge Collier, granted summary judgment to the Credit Union on the statutory claim, finding Griggs could not demonstrate an exclusive causal relationship between her reporting activities and her termination, nor a contemporaneous fear of dismissal. The Court reserved ruling on whether a concurrent common law cause of action for retaliatory discharge exists, inviting further briefing.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.