Jump to content

Recommended Posts

If an ex employee sues the company for wrongful termination, and the company lists a current employee as a 3rd party who had allegedly filed a complaint/grievance against said employee(along with others-the primary basis for dismissal), what are the rights of the 3rd party? Is the company obligated to alert the current employee of this status? Is it lawful to keep the employee in the dark until actually needed? How would the employee proceed if he did not file a complaint as listed and feels misrepresented by the company for their own gain? Would the employee have a right to a reveal of intentions of the company, so they could choose to rebut/decline? Can the employee just be listed in lawsuit paperwork with no consultation, guidance, or instruction whatsoever, and have no idea about this until called in out of the blue?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, Duane said:

If an ex employee sues the company for wrongful termination, and the company lists a current employee as a 3rd party

What do you mean by 'lists a current employee"?  If the employee is brought into the suit as a 'party' they would be served with papers indicating they are a co-defendant or co-plaintiff.  If so, the employee would have to file an answer alleging why they are not liable or involved.

 

If, on the other hand, the employee is merely listed in the list of witness or is served with a notice of deposition, they are merely a witness and have no duties except to appear at the deposition or trial and testify truthfully.  If they feel their position is misrepresented they would testify to that at the trial or deposition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, I found out about my 'listing' from the plaintiff. I hadn't talked to this person since last year, and they contacted me. We had small talk and then i was asked a question. This person claimed to have gotten info that I had filed a complaint against her at work, and expressed surprise because we had a good working relationship. Shocked, and knowing I had filed no complaint, I denied it and asked what she was talking about. Then she said she had a lawsuit and I was included in a group of people who were listed by the company. Now I have talked to the plaintiff and given info. I had no knowledge of being included in this legal process, and if what I am told is true, I feel as tho the company has misrepresented me in this. i never went to the company to file a complaint on this person, so not sure what is going on.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/12/2018 at 1:15 AM, Duane said:

If an ex employee sues the company for wrongful termination, and the company lists a current employee as a 3rd party who had allegedly filed a complaint/grievance against said employee(along with others-the primary basis for dismissal), what are the rights of the 3rd party?

 

I can see no conceivable utility in trying to compile a list of this person's rights.

 

 

On 8/12/2018 at 1:15 AM, Duane said:

Would the employee have a right to a reveal of intentions of the company, so they could choose to rebut/decline?

 

Reveal the intentions of the company to whom?  Who are "they"?

 

 

On 8/12/2018 at 1:15 AM, Duane said:

Can the employee just be listed in lawsuit paperwork with no consultation, guidance, or instruction whatsoever, and have no idea about this until called in out of the blue?

 

Yes.

 

 

On 8/12/2018 at 8:02 AM, Duane said:

she said she had a lawsuit and I was included in a group of people who were listed by the company.

 

Listed on what?

 

 

On 8/12/2018 at 8:02 AM, Duane said:

I feel as tho the company has misrepresented me in this.

 

Have you seen the document on which you were "listed"?

 

As far as I can tell, a former co-worker of your sued your employer.  At some point in this process, your employer identified you (probably as a potential witness).  You don't seem to have any clear information about the context in which you were identified.  Without any information about that, there's nothing much anyone here can tell you except that it's certainly legal for a party to a lawsuit to identify potential witnesses without consulting with each such person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Duane said:

Looks like she wasn't lying. I'm supposed to meet with company attorney today.....not good news.....

Don't jump to conclusions.  Meet with the company attorney and see what the issues are.

 

Take notes while you are with the company attorney.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will take notes, thx. My issue is if I am asked, at any point, if i had contact with the plaintiff, I would have to answer 'yes'. That would paint me in a bad light. I'm worried about my job if I cannot be utilized by the company for their end means. There has been no on-going collusion between me and the plaintiff, just the one conversation that revealed to me I had been included, in some way, in this legal wrangling. It would be hard for them to believe I wasn't assisting her in some way. Of course, if it went that far, there would be no proof in my phone records/email/text records of contact with plaintiff, aside from the one convo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it is in your (and the company's) best interest for you to be truthful.

give the company the facts that you have and let the company worry about how to respond to the plaintiff.

 

18 minutes ago, Duane said:

My issue is if I am asked, at any point, if i had contact with the plaintiff, I would have to answer 'yes'.

 

Yes, but you have indicated in your post (above) that your contact was pretty limited, and if asked about your contacts with the plaintiff you'll be able to give the company attorney that same information.

 

Whatever risks you feel you may be taking by supplying truthful information, worse things will result from your supplying misleading, intentionally inaccurate, or otherwise false information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, MiddlePart said:

it is in your (and the company's) best interest for you to be truthful.

give the company the facts that you have and let the company worry about how to respond to the plaintiff.

 

I agree. I would not consider giving false info. Telling the truth can bring its own problems, however, but I would choose the truth in this matter.

8 minutes ago, MiddlePart said:

Yes, but you have indicated in your post (above) that your contact was pretty limited, and if asked about your contacts with the plaintiff you'll be able to give the company attorney that same information.

This is true, records searches would support my claim.

Whatever risks you feel you may be taking by supplying truthful information, worse things will result from your supplying misleading, intentionally inaccurate, or otherwise false information.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, pg1067 said:

 

I can see no conceivable utility in trying to compile a list of this person's rights.

 

This would be in reference to knowing the intentions of the company so one could recuse themselves if they didn't want to be included. Doesn't sound like that is an option. In other words, thx for including me in this BS, but I'll pass

 

Reveal the intentions of the company to whom?  Who are "they"?

 

The employee in question

 

Yes.

 

Thx

 

Listed on what?

 

Listed as witness/resource for the defendant in discovery paperwork it appears 

 

Have you seen the document on which you were "listed"?

No

As far as I can tell, a former co-worker of your sued your employer.  At some point in this process, your employer identified you (probably as a potential witness).  You don't seem to have any clear information about the context in which you were identified.  Without any information about that, there's nothing much anyone here can tell you except that it's certainly legal for a party to a lawsuit to identify potential witnesses without consulting with each such person.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None of this follow up stuff is particularly relevant in a legal sense, but it seems you don't hold your employer in very high regard, which certainly isn't a legal issue.

 

It is common in litigation for the parties to ask each other to identify all persons who have or may have knowledge regarding any issue in the lawsuit.  In a former employee v. former employer case, it is not uncommon for the employer to respond by identifying everyone with whom the former employee worked.  If you were worried about how your employer would perceive you communicating with this plaintiff, then maybe you shouldn't have done it.

 

Or maybe you're seriously overthinking all of this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Duane said:

I will take notes, thx. My issue is if I am asked, at any point, if i had contact with the plaintiff, I would have to answer 'yes'. That would paint me in a bad light. I'm worried about my job if I cannot be utilized by the company for their end means. There has been no on-going collusion between me and the plaintiff, just the one conversation that revealed to me I had been included, in some way, in this legal wrangling. It would be hard for them to believe I wasn't assisting her in some way. Of course, if it went that far, there would be no proof in my phone records/email/text records of contact with plaintiff, aside from the one convo.

 

 

If or when they ask you about contact you tell them the truth about the phone call and what was said.  That simple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/13/2018 at 5:08 PM, pg1067 said:

None of this follow up stuff is particularly relevant in a legal sense, but it seems you don't hold your employer in very high regard, which certainly isn't a legal issue.

 

It is common in litigation for the parties to ask each other to identify all persons who have or may have knowledge regarding any issue in the lawsuit.  In a former employee v. former employer case, it is not uncommon for the employer to respond by identifying everyone with whom the former employee worked.  If you were worried about how your employer would perceive you communicating with this plaintiff, then maybe you shouldn't have done it.

 

Or maybe you're seriously overthinking all of this.

Thx.

With the shady, unethical practices I have witnessed, holding the employer in high regard would not be possible for myself or any other reasonable, prudent person. 

Don't believe im overthinking, there is crookedness afoot, I have no doubt.

If I had some idea it would be detrimental to talk to the plaintiff, I certainly would not have. Even before that, I would have attempted to recuse myself, or, at the very least, expressed my desire to abstain from the drama madness. That is one reason I came here, to inquire if that would even be an option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...