Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Sheets v. Teddy’s Frosted Foods

Connecticut Supreme Court
427 A.2d 385 (1980)


Between 1973 and 1977, Emard H. Sheets (plaintiff) was employed by Teddy's Frosted Foods, Inc. (TFFI) (defendant) as quality control director and then as operations manager. In the course of performing the work required by these positions, he observed that lower quality produce and underweight meat were being used in TFFI's products. The use of these lower quality items in TFFI's finished products was inconsistent with TFFI's product packaging and in violation of the Connecticut Uniform Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. Sheets brought this to the attention of TFFI and made recommendations for correcting the problem. No action was taken in regard to his suggestions and a few months later his employment was terminated. Despite having received raises and bonuses during his employment, TFFI claimed Sheets' termination was due to unsatisfactory performance. Sheets brought an action for wrongful discharge on three grounds: breach of an implied contract of employment, violation of public policy and malicious discharge. The trial court dismissed the complaint and Sheets appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.


The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Peters, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Dissent (Cotter, C.J.)

The dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the dissenting judge or justice’s opinion.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

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 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read 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. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 221,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 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.