California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from General Dynamics Corp. v. Superior Court, 32 Cal.Rptr.2d 1, 7 Cal.4th 1164, 876 P.2d 487 (Cal. 1994):
Although none has involved the common law right of in-house counsel to maintain retaliatory discharge claims presented by the complaint in this case, several cases have recognized the importance of professional ethical codes as a counterweight to employer overreaching. In Parker v. M & T Chemicals, Inc. (1989) 236 N.J.Super. 451, 566 A.2d 215, for example, the chief in-house patent attorney for a manufacturer of electronic chemicals, alleging that he was demoted and later constructively discharged for refusing to copy [7 Cal.4th 1187] technical information purloined from a sealed federal court file, filed a damage suit under the New Jersey whistle-blower statute. The company defended on the ground that "a client has a right to discharge an attorney employed by a corporation as house counsel, with or without cause, and without fear of sanction ... at any time the client corporation chooses to end the relationship, notwithstanding the provisions [of the whistle-blower statute] ..." (Id. at p. 219.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.