STATE BEVERAGE DEPT.

v.

GUTHREY

Citator

Cited By

• Muller v. Stromberg Carlson Corp., 427 So. 2d 266 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)
  …as indefinite and terminable at will. That this has been the law of Florida and of at least the majority of jurisdictions is shown by the extensive review of the subject in Russell & Axon v. Handshoe, 176 So. 2d 909 (Fla. 1st DCA 1965), cert. den., 188 So. 2d 317 (Fla.1966). Appellant argues that we should adopt the law developing in some other jurisdictions which may allow policy statements by an employer to give rise to enforceable contract rights of employees without the parties’ explicit mutual agreemen…
• Raoul Vienneau v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 548 So. 2d 856 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989)
  …, 484 So. 2d 10 (Fla.1986); Innkeepers International, Inc. v. McCoy Motels, Ltd., 324 So. 2d 676, 678-79 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975), cert. denied, 336 So. 2d 106 (Fla.1976); Russell & Axon v. Handshoe, 176 So. 2d 909, 912 (Fla. 1st DCA 1965), cert. denied, 188 So. 2d 317 (Fla.1966). See also Zepfler v. Neandross, 497 So. 2d 901, 903 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986); Reliance Insurance Co. v. Brickenkamp, 147 So. 2d 200, 202 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962).4 Various principles have emerged to aid the court in its interpretation. A cardinal ru…
• Hamlen v. Fairchild Indus., Inc., 413 So. 2d 800 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)
  …eby causing damages, both compensatory and punitive. The propriety of the action based on the alleged breach of the oral contract is controlled by this court’s opinion in Russell & Axon v. Handshoe, 176 So. 2d 909 (Fla. 1st DCA 1965), cert. denied, 188 So. 2d 317 (Fla.1966), wherein we precluded a former employee from suing an employer under such a theory. Although Russell & Axon involved a written contract of employment — not as here an oral contract — it is nevertheless applicable, because both contracts a…