In Samuda v. Recipco Corp., the plaintiff was dismissed from her position, and brought an action for wrongful termination and breach of an employment contract. What did the Court determine?

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The Court determined that Samuda was an employee since she was subject to the control and direction of Recipco. Therefore, she had an obligation to give notice of termination and could bring an action for wrongful termination and breach of contract. Option A is incorrect because the Court did not find Samuda in violation of her fiduciary duty. Option B is incorrect because fiduciary duties can arise in an employment relationship. Option D is incorrect because the Court found that the level of control and direction was enough to establish an employment relationship. Option E is incorrect because the Court found that Samuda was subject to the control and direction of Recipco.

In Samuda V