Munoz v. Kaiser Steel Corp.
California Court of Appeal
203 Cal. Rptr. 345 (1984)

- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Anthony Munoz (plaintiff) was unemployed and living in Texas. He interviewed at Kaiser Steel Corporation (Kaiser) (defendant) in California. Kaiser tentatively hired Munoz, pending approval of Kaiser’s management. Munoz’s interviewer told him that he would be trained for at least three years. Munoz took this to mean that he was guaranteed employment for at least three years. Kaiser management approved the hiring, and Munoz moved to California and began working for Kaiser. Kaiser sold his house in Texas and bought a house in California. About six months after Munoz began work, Kaiser laid him off. Munoz sued Kaiser for breach of an alleged oral employment contract, under which Kaiser promised Munoz at least three years of employment. The trial court granted Kaiser summary judgment based on the statute of frauds. Munoz appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kaufman, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 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.