WRONGFUL TERMINATION DEMAND LETTER

District of Columbia Law

[ATTORNEY/FIRM LETTERHEAD]

[Firm Name]
[Address Line 1]
[City, State ZIP]
Tel: [Phone Number]
Fax: [Fax Number]
[Attorney Email]
[D.C. Bar No.]

VIA CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
AND VIA EMAIL TO: [recipient_email]

[Date]

[Employer Contact Name]
[Title]
[Company Legal Name]
[Company Address]
[City, State ZIP]

Re: Wrongful Termination of [Client Full Name]
Former Position: [Job Title]
Dates of Employment: [Start Date] through [Termination Date]
CONFIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT COMMUNICATION - Protected Under FRE 408

Dear [Mr./Ms./Mx. Last Name]:

This firm represents [Client Full Name] ("our client") regarding [his/her/their] wrongful termination from employment with [Company Legal Name] ("[Company Short Name]") on [Termination Date]. Please direct all further communications to our office.

We write to demand immediate action to remedy the unlawful termination and to resolve this matter short of litigation. [Company Short Name]'s termination of our client violates District of Columbia law and exposes the Company to substantial liability.

I. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA EMPLOYMENT LAW FRAMEWORK

A. At-Will Employment and Its Exceptions

The District of Columbia follows the employment-at-will doctrine but recognizes significant exceptions. See Adams v. George W. Cochran & Co., 597 A.2d 28 (D.C. 1991).

1. Public Policy Exception

D.C. broadly recognizes the public policy exception to at-will employment. See Carl v. Children's Hosp., 702 A.2d 159 (D.C. 1997); Fingerhut v. Children's Nat'l Med. Ctr., 738 A.2d 799 (D.C. 1999).

Protected activities under D.C. public policy include:
- Refusing to violate a law or regulation
- Reporting employer's illegal activities
- Exercising statutory rights (workers' compensation, jury duty)
- Filing complaints with regulatory agencies
- Cooperating with government investigations

2. Implied Contract Exception

D.C. recognizes implied employment contracts based on employer handbooks, policies, and oral representations. See Strass v. Kaiser Found. Health Plan of the Mid-Atlantic States, Inc., 744 A.2d 1000 (D.C. 2000).

3. Statutory Protections

D.C. provides extensive statutory protections:
- D.C. Human Rights Act (DCHRA): D.C. Code Section 2-1401.01 et seq.
- D.C. Whistleblower Protection Act: D.C. Code Section 2-223.01 et seq.
- D.C. Public Employee Whistleblower Protection: D.C. Code Section 1-615.51 et seq.
- D.C. Family and Medical Leave Act: D.C. Code Section 32-501 et seq.
- D.C. Parental Leave Act: D.C. Code Section 32-1201 et seq.
- Workers' Compensation Retaliation: D.C. Code Section 32-1542
- Jury Service Protection: D.C. Code Section 11-1913

B. D.C. Administrative Procedures

D.C. Office of Human Rights (OHR):
- File within 1 year of alleged discriminatory act
- After 1 year with no administrative decision, may file directly in court
- Dual-filing with EEOC available (300 days for EEOC claims)

II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

A. Employment History

[Client Full Name] was employed by [Company Short Name] from [Start Date] through [Termination Date] as a [Job Title] in Washington, D.C.

Employment Summary:

Our client was a dedicated employee with an excellent performance record:
- [Describe positive performance history]
- [Describe promotions, raises, commendations]
- [Describe any relevant achievements]

B. The Protected Activity / Triggering Event

On or about [Date], our client [describe protected activity]:

• Reported illegal or unethical conduct to [employer / regulatory agency]
• Refused to participate in illegal activity
• Filed a discrimination complaint under the DCHRA
• Filed a workers' compensation claim under D.C. Code Section 32-1542
• Exercised rights under the D.C. Family and Medical Leave Act
• Reported fraud, waste, or abuse (Whistleblower Protection Act)
• [Other protected activity]

C. The Wrongful Termination

On [Termination Date], [Company Short Name] terminated our client, purportedly for [stated reason]. This stated reason is pretextual, as evidenced by:

1. Temporal proximity: The termination occurred just [X days/weeks] after the protected activity
2. Prior positive treatment: Our client had [no prior discipline / positive reviews / recent promotion]
3. Disparate treatment: Similarly situated employees who did not engage in protected activity were [not terminated / treated more favorably]
4. Shifting explanations: [Describe any inconsistent reasons given]
5. Direct evidence: [Describe any statements indicating true motive]

III. LEGAL CLAIMS UNDER D.C. LAW

A. Wrongful Discharge in Violation of Public Policy

Under D.C. common law, an employee may bring a claim for wrongful discharge when termination violates a clear mandate of public policy. See Carl v. Children's Hosp., 702 A.2d 159 (D.C. 1997).

Elements of Claim:
1. Employer-employee relationship
2. Termination of employment
3. Termination violated a clear mandate of public policy
4. Damages resulting from termination

Public Policy Violated: [Company Short Name] terminated our client for [describe conduct that violated public policy], which violates [cite specific D.C. statute, regulation, or case law].

See also Fingerhut v. Children's Nat'l Med. Ctr., 738 A.2d 799 (D.C. 1999); Liberatore v. Melville Corp., 168 F.3d 1326 (D.C. Cir. 1999).

B. Whistleblower Retaliation (D.C. Code Section 2-223.01 et seq.)

D.C.'s Whistleblower Protection Act provides comprehensive protection for private employees who report:

• Gross mismanagement
• Gross misuse or waste of public resources
• Abuse of authority
• Violation of any law, rule, or regulation

Our client reported [describe report of illegal activity or waste] on [Date]. [Company Short Name] terminated our client in retaliation for this protected whistleblowing activity.

Remedies under the Whistleblower Protection Act:
- Reinstatement to former position
- Back pay and lost benefits
- Compensatory damages
- Reasonable attorney's fees and costs
- Injunctive relief

C. Violation of D.C. Human Rights Act (D.C. Code Section 2-1401.01 et seq.)

[If applicable:] [Company Short Name]'s termination of our client constitutes unlawful [discrimination/retaliation] under the DCHRA based on [protected characteristic/protected activity].

The DCHRA provides expansive protections, prohibiting discrimination based on:
- Race, color, religion, national origin
- Sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression
- Age, disability, genetic information
- Marital status, personal appearance
- Family responsibilities, matriculation
- Political affiliation, credit information
- Source of income, place of residence or business

DCHRA Remedies:
- Unlimited compensatory damages
- Punitive damages (no cap)
- Attorney's fees and costs
- Injunctive relief

D. Retaliatory Discharge - Workers' Compensation (D.C. Code Section 32-1542)

[If applicable:] D.C. Code Section 32-1542 prohibits employers from discharging employees for filing workers' compensation claims.

Our client filed a workers' compensation claim on [Date] for [injury]. [Company Short Name] terminated our client in retaliation for exercising this statutory right.

E. Breach of Implied Contract

[Company Short Name]'s Employee Handbook and representations created an implied contract limiting termination to "just cause" and/or requiring specific progressive discipline procedures.

Evidence of implied contract:
- Employee Handbook provisions stating [quote relevant language]
- Personnel policies requiring [describe procedures]
- Oral representations by [Name] that [describe assurances]

See Strass v. Kaiser Found. Health Plan of the Mid-Atlantic States, Inc., 744 A.2d 1000 (D.C. 2000).

IV. DAMAGES

A. Economic Damages

1. Back Pay

2. Lost Benefits

3. Front Pay

B. Compensatory Damages (Non-Economic)

Our client has suffered severe emotional distress:
- [Describe anxiety, depression, humiliation]
- [Describe impact on health and relationships]
- [Describe medical treatment sought]

Emotional distress damages: $[Amount]

C. Punitive Damages

[Company Short Name]'s conduct was willful, malicious, and in reckless disregard of our client's rights, warranting punitive damages.

Under the DCHRA, punitive damages are available without statutory cap for willful violations.

D. Attorney's Fees

Under D.C. Code Section 2-1403.16 (DCHRA) and Section 2-223.04 (Whistleblower Protection Act), our client is entitled to reasonable attorney's fees.

Estimated fees through trial: $[Amount]

E. Summary of Damages

V. SETTLEMENT DEMAND

We demand that [Company Short Name] pay $[Settlement Demand Amount] in full settlement of all claims.

Additional Terms:
- Neutral reference (dates and position only)
- No contest to unemployment benefits
- Expungement of personnel file
- Mutual non-disparagement
- Confidentiality (terms to be negotiated)

VI. RESPONSE DEADLINE

Please respond within fourteen (14) calendar days, no later than [Response Deadline Date].

If we do not receive a satisfactory response, we are authorized to file suit in the [Superior Court of the District of Columbia / United States District Court for the District of Columbia] without further notice.

Causes of Action:
1. Wrongful Discharge in Violation of Public Policy
2. Violation of D.C. Whistleblower Protection Act (D.C. Code Section 2-223.01 et seq.)
3. Violation of D.C. Human Rights Act (D.C. Code Section 2-1401.01 et seq.)
4. Violation of D.C. Code Section 32-1542 (Workers' Compensation Retaliation)
5. Breach of Implied Contract

VII. DOCUMENT PRESERVATION

Immediately implement a litigation hold to preserve all relevant documents and ESI regarding our client's employment, performance, and termination.

VIII. CONFIDENTIALITY

This letter constitutes a confidential settlement communication protected under Federal Rule of Evidence 408 and applicable D.C. rules.

Sincerely,

[Attorney Name]
[Title]
[Firm Name]
[D.C. Bar No.]

Enclosures:
- Authorization to Represent

cc: [Client Name]
[File]

D.C.-SPECIFIC PRACTICE NOTES (Do Not Include in Final Letter)

Key D.C. Considerations

• D.C. broadly recognizes public policy exception to at-will employment
• DCHRA is one of the most expansive anti-discrimination laws in the country
• No caps on compensatory or punitive damages under DCHRA
• 1-year filing deadline with OHR (much longer than EEOC's 180/300 days)
• Whistleblower Protection Act covers private employers
• D.C. is a deferral jurisdiction for EEOC purposes - 300-day deadline
• Personal appearance and credit information are protected classes in D.C.

Venue Options

• D.C. Superior Court (general jurisdiction)
• Federal Court (if federal claims or diversity jurisdiction)
• D.C. Office of Human Rights (administrative)

Statute of Limitations

Key D.C. Cases

• Adams v. George W. Cochran & Co., 597 A.2d 28 (D.C. 1991)
• Carl v. Children's Hosp., 702 A.2d 159 (D.C. 1997)
• Fingerhut v. Children's Nat'l Med. Ctr., 738 A.2d 799 (D.C. 1999)
• Strass v. Kaiser Found. Health Plan of the Mid-Atlantic States, Inc., 744 A.2d 1000 (D.C. 2000)
• Liberatore v. Melville Corp., 168 F.3d 1326 (D.C. Cir. 1999)