# Tameny v. Atlantic Richfield Co.

> California Supreme Court · June 2, 1980 · 27 Cal. 3d 167

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9564197

## Case

- **Full name:** GORDON TAMENY, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY Et Al., Defendants and Respondents
- **Court:** California Supreme Court
- **Decided:** June 2, 1980
- **Citations:** 27 Cal. 3d 167; 164 Cal. Rptr. 839; 610 P.2d 1330; 9 A.L.R. 4th 314; 1 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 102; 115 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 3119; 1980 Cal. LEXIS 171
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Manuel
- **Judges:** Tobriner, Manuel, Clark
- **Cited by:** 600 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9564197

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- stating that “[a]n employee discharged for refusing to engage in illegal conduct 16 at his employer's request may bring a tort action for wrongful discharge,” and discussing 17 the common law origins of this claim in California
- holding that “when an employer’s discharge of an employee 14 violates fundamental principles of public policy, the discharged employee may maintain a 15 tort action and recover damages traditionally available in such actions”
- holding that “when an employer’s discharge of an employee violates fundamental principles of public policy, the discharged employee may maintain a tort action and recover damages traditionally available in such actions”
- holding that at-will employees may recover tort damages from employers if they can show they were discharged in contravention of fundamental public policy
- explaining California’s cause 18 of action for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy

## Opinion text

MANUEL, J.
I concur in the judgment.
In my view the cause of action here in question flows from a clear statutory source—i.e., the provisions of section 2856 of the Labor Code. (Cf. Montalvo v. Zamora (1970) 7 Cal.App.3d 69, 73-75 [ 86 Cal.Rptr. 401 ].) Accordingly, I see no reason to search further for it among the vague and ill-defined dictates of “fundamental public policy.”

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9564197. Public record. Not legal advice.