Okay, that might actually work out in your favor. Since there are falsities involved here, the first thing to do is to sue or threaten to sue the employee that made the false statements for defamation and tortious interference. See elements of both below: 1. To establish a claim for defamation under MN law, a plaintiff must demonstrate the following elements: (1) a defamatory statement; (2) published to a third person; (3) which is false; and (4) that tends to harm her reputation and to lower him in the estimation of the community. The statute of limitations for defamation claims in Minnesota is two years. Defamation must be pled with “particularity.” So you must identify the speaker, the statements, the context and time in which they were made and to whom they were made. Under the specificity requirement, the actual defamatory language must be set forth in the pleadings along with the “who, what, why, where and when” or else it may be subject to a motion under Rule 12 for dismissal for a more definite statement. 2. The 2nd claim is called "tortious interference with prospective economic advantage". To succeed, a plaintiff must show that: (1) the defendant intentionally and improperly interfered with the prospective contractual relation; (2) the interference caused pecuniary harm resulting from loss of the benefits of the relation; and (3) the interference either (a) induced or otherwise caused a third person not to enter into or continue the prospective relation; or (b) prevented the continuance of the prospective relation. United Wild Rice, Inc. v. Nelson, 313 N.W.2d 628, 633 (Minn. 1982). This is the closest thing that MN law has to the actual claim which is termed "Wrongful Interference With Employment Relationship" which can be used even in at-will employment situations. Here are its elements: The person damaged by the interference will usually need to prove the following things in order to sue: There was an existing employment relationship; The person who caused the interference was a third party to the relationship;The third party's conduct interfered with the relationship; The third party intended to interfere; andThe third party's conduct caused the employee's termination. So, I would plead this as a 3rd claim as well even if MN law does not recognize it as of yet. As far as suing the employer, that will be a little more problematic. Minnesota is an employment "at will
" state. The employer can fire any employee for any reason as long as that reason is not because of discrimination
based on race, creed, color, sex, national origin, ancestry, religion, age, disability, sexual orientation or marital status. Under at-will employment, an employee has to prove that the employer was more than just unreasonable or unfair to succeed with a wrongful termination
claim. Pretty much if there is no formal employment contract
or employee handbook
that sets forth termination procedures that your employer violated, you really should think twice before wasting your time and money on a claim against the employer. But, that is not to say that you could not sue your boss in his or individual capacity just like you can sue the co-worker. My suggestion to you if you want to get somewhere on this quickly is to pay a local employment law
attorney fire off a demand letter for about $250.00 against the co-worker who will then tell the boss what is going on; a few days after co-worker receives the email, you then write a letter to your boss and ask to meet with him/her and see if things can be worked out over lunch to get your job back. If this fails then have the lawyer send out a second letter threaten to also sue the boss personally for monetary damages
you have and will in the future suffer from the termination.