Allum v. Valley Bank of Nevada
The Matter.
Nevada Supreme Court precedent establishing that a tortious-discharge claim is available where an employee is terminated for refusing to engage in conduct he in good faith reasonably believes to be illegal. Still cited in Nevada wrongful-discharge doctrine.
What the record shows.
- ¶ 01
Robert Allum, represented by Mr. McKenna, was terminated by Valley Bank of Nevada after refusing to engage in conduct that he alleged involved federal Fair Housing Act violations. The question before the Nevada Supreme Court was whether the tort of wrongful discharge required proof that the employee had been presented with an explicit “participate or be fired” ultimatum, or whether a good-faith reasonable belief of illegality was sufficient.
- ¶ 02
The Nevada Supreme Court held that the claim is available where the employee is terminated for refusing to engage in conduct he in good faith reasonably believes to be illegal. Proof of an explicit ultimatum is not required. Allum v. Valley Bank of Nevada, 970 P.2d 1062 (Nev. 1998).
The path through the courts.
- STEP 01Nev. Sup. Ct.Allum v. Valley Bank of Nevada, 970 P.2d 1062 (Nev. 1998)Reported
The opinion continues to be cited in Nevada wrongful-discharge and whistleblower-style litigation, and in federal cases applying Nevada law.
Lead / Counsel of record — Kenneth J. McKenna, Nevada Bar № 1676
This matter sits within Mr. McKenna’s Trial Counsel for Attorneys practice.