Elliott v. Board of Trustees of Montgomery County Community College

655 A.2d 46, 104 Md. App. 93 (1995)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Elliott v. Board of Trustees of Montgomery County Community College

Maryland Court of Special Appeals
655 A.2d 46, 104 Md. App. 93 (1995)

Facts

James Elliott (plaintiff) was an employee of Montgomery County Community College (defendant). At the time of his hiring in 1979, Elliott was provided a copy of the college’s Policies and Procedures Manual to read. In 1988, Elliott was promoted to a supervisory position and provided his copy of the Policies and Procedures Manual. Also in 1988, the college issued a new Policies and Procedures Manual with a disclaimer in the introduction to the manual stating that the manual did not create an express or implied employment contract. The new Policies and Procedures Manual, distributed college-wide, was accompanied by a two-page memorandum stating that the purpose of the new manual was to make the manual easier to reference. In 1992, Elliott was accused of sexually harassing a female colleague. Elliott was demoted from his position and notified, in writing, that any further disciplinary issue could result in immediate termination. In 1993, Elliott was caught leaving work before the end of his shift on several occasions and terminated by the college in accordance with the Policies and Procedures Manual. No evidence of bad faith on behalf of the college was shown. Elliott filed a lawsuit against the college, alleging a breach of an employment contract. The college filed a motion for summary judgment, pointing to the disclaimer in the 1988 Policies and Procedures Manual. Elliott responded that he had not seen the disclaimer. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the college, and Elliott appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Cathell, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 806,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership