Section 18

Citation: Section 18
Parent Document: Mogilevsky v. Keating, 11 Mass. L. Rptr. 332 (2000)
Jurisdiction: Massachusetts (state)
Effective Date: 2000-02-11
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/8353877/mogilevsky-v-keating/ ↗

Full Text

885 chars

Mogilevsky alleges further that the termination of his employment was a violation of public policy. (Id. at ¶¶29, 55.) Taking Mogilevsky’s allegations as true, he is an at-will employee who, immediately after becoming aware that his apartment would not be renovated and after making complaints to the Landlord about the living conditions of his apartment, was told that his position would be terminated. (Id. at ¶¶26-29.) Mogilevsky is not arguing that the reasons for his dismissal are the formal complaints with the BIS or the MCAD, which had not yet occurred, but is arguing that his complaint to the Landlord in April was the reason he was fired. As Mogilevsky maintains that he was terminated solely because he was asserting the legally guaranteed right of having a habitable apartment under the State Sanitary Code, Defendants’ motion to dismiss Count IX is denied. 4.G.L.c. 93A.

Other Sections in This Document (45)

Full Text