WRONGFUL TERMINATION DEMAND LETTER

Maryland Law

[ATTORNEY/FIRM LETTERHEAD]

[Firm Name]
[Address Line 1]
[City, State ZIP]
Tel: [Phone Number]
Fax: [Fax Number]
[Attorney Email]
[Maryland Client Protection Fund ID 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 - MD. RULE 5-408

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 Maryland law and exposes the Company to substantial liability.

I. MARYLAND EMPLOYMENT LAW FRAMEWORK

A. At-Will Employment and Its Exceptions

Maryland follows the employment-at-will doctrine. See Adler v. American Standard Corp., 291 Md. 31, 432 A.2d 464 (1981). However, Maryland courts recognize broad exceptions:

1. Public Policy Exception

Maryland broadly recognizes the public policy exception to at-will employment. See Adler v. American Standard Corp., 291 Md. 31, 432 A.2d 464 (1981) (landmark Maryland case); Makovi v. Sherwin-Williams Co., 316 Md. 603, 561 A.2d 179 (1989).

Protected activities under Maryland public policy include:
- Refusing to violate a law or regulation (Adler)
- Filing workers' compensation claims
- Exercising statutory rights
- Reporting illegal employer conduct (whistleblowing)
- Performing important public duties (jury duty)
- Refusing to engage in tortious conduct

2. Implied Contract Exception

Maryland recognizes implied employment contracts based on employer handbooks, policies, and oral representations. See Castiglione v. Johns Hopkins Hosp., 69 Md. App. 325, 517 A.2d 786 (1986).

3. Statutory Protections

Maryland provides extensive statutory protections:
- Maryland Fair Employment Practices Act (MFEPA): Md. Code, State Gov't Section 20-601 et seq.
- Workers' Compensation Retaliation: Md. Code, Lab. & Empl. Section 9-1105
- Jury Service Protection: Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. Section 8-501
- Maryland Healthy Working Families Act: Md. Code, Lab. & Empl. Section 3-1301 et seq.
- Occupational Safety Retaliation: Md. Code, Lab. & Empl. Section 5-604

B. Maryland Administrative Procedures

Maryland Commission on Civil Rights (MCCR):
- File within 6 months of alleged discriminatory act (administrative)
- Alternatively, file directly in court within 2 years
- Dual-filing with EEOC available (300 days for EEOC in deferral state)
- Right to sue after 180 days if no resolution

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 [City], Maryland.

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]:

• Refused to violate Maryland or federal law by [describe illegal act requested]
• Filed a workers' compensation claim under Md. Code, Lab. & Empl. Section 9-1105
• Filed a discrimination complaint with MCCR
• Reported illegal employer conduct
• Served on jury duty as required by law
• Reported workplace safety violations
• [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 MARYLAND LAW

A. Wrongful Discharge in Violation of Public Policy

Under Adler v. American Standard Corp., 291 Md. 31, 432 A.2d 464 (1981), Maryland recognizes a cause of action for wrongful discharge when termination violates a clear mandate of public policy.

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

Categories of Public Policy Protection (per Makovi v. Sherwin-Williams Co., 316 Md. 603, 561 A.2d 179 (1989)):
1. Discharging employee for refusing to violate any law or established rule of professional conduct
2. Discharging employee for exercising a specific legal right or duty
3. Discharging employee for performing an important public duty (whistleblowing)
4. Discharging employee for reporting employer's illegal conduct

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

B. Retaliatory Discharge - Workers' Compensation (Md. Code, Lab. & Empl. Section 9-1105)

[If applicable:] Maryland Labor and Employment Article Section 9-1105 provides:

"An employer may not discharge or otherwise discriminate against a covered employee solely because the covered employee... files a claim for compensation under this title..."

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

Remedies:
- Lost wages and benefits
- Reinstatement
- Compensatory damages
- Attorney's fees

C. Violation of Maryland Fair Employment Practices Act (Md. Code, State Gov't Section 20-601 et seq.)

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

The MFEPA prohibits discrimination based on:
- Race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry
- Sex (including pregnancy), sexual orientation, gender identity
- Age, disability, genetic information
- Marital status

MFEPA Remedies (Section 20-1009):
- Compensatory damages (no cap)
- Punitive damages
- Reasonable attorney's fees and costs
- Injunctive relief

Note: MFEPA allows direct filing in court within 2 years without administrative exhaustion.

D. 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 Castiglione v. Johns Hopkins Hosp., 69 Md. App. 325, 517 A.2d 786 (1986).

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 malicious, wanton, and in reckless disregard of our client's rights, warranting punitive damages under Maryland law.

See Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. Zenobia, 325 Md. 420, 601 A.2d 633 (1992) (punitive damages standard in Maryland).

D. Attorney's Fees

Under Md. Code, State Gov't Section 20-1009 (MFEPA), 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 [Circuit Court for [County] County, Maryland / United States District Court for the District of Maryland] without further notice.

Causes of Action:
1. Wrongful Discharge in Violation of Public Policy
2. Violation of Md. Code, Lab. & Empl. Section 9-1105 (Workers' Compensation Retaliation)
3. Violation of Maryland Fair Employment Practices Act
4. 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 is protected by Maryland Rule 5-408 and constitutes a confidential settlement communication.

Sincerely,

[Attorney Name]
[Title]
[Firm Name]
[Maryland Client Protection Fund ID No.]

Enclosures:
- Authorization to Represent

cc: [Client Name]
[File]

MARYLAND-SPECIFIC PRACTICE NOTES (Do Not Include in Final Letter)

Key Maryland Considerations

• Maryland broadly recognizes public policy exception under Adler and Makovi
• Makovi provides four-category framework for public policy claims
• Implied contract claims are viable with proper handbook language
• MFEPA allows direct filing in court within 2 years (bypassing MCCR)
• 6-month MCCR filing deadline is SHORT if using administrative process
• Maryland is a deferral state for EEOC purposes - 300-day deadline
• No caps on compensatory damages under MFEPA
• Sexual orientation and gender identity are protected under MFEPA
• Montgomery County and other local jurisdictions have additional protections

Venue Options

• Maryland Circuit Court (general jurisdiction)
• Federal Court (if federal claims or diversity jurisdiction)

Statute of Limitations

Key Maryland Cases

• Adler v. American Standard Corp., 291 Md. 31, 432 A.2d 464 (1981)
• Makovi v. Sherwin-Williams Co., 316 Md. 603, 561 A.2d 179 (1989)
• Castiglione v. Johns Hopkins Hosp., 69 Md. App. 325, 517 A.2d 786 (1986)
• Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. Zenobia, 325 Md. 420, 601 A.2d 633 (1992)
• Wholey v. Sears Roebuck, 370 Md. 38, 803 A.2d 482 (2002)