§ 6.8.5.2. At-Will Employment. It is currently an unresolved question as to whether Arizona recognizes the theory of promissory estoppel for promises of at-will employment. The Arizona Court of Appeals reached conflicting conclusions in two memorandum decisions. In Walter v. Prestige Staffing, LLC39 the court, citing Higginbottom v. State, concluded that "Arizona recognizes the theory of promissory estoppel for a promise of at-will employment."40 However, in Rafique v. Sigma Motors Inc.,41 the court disagreed with the plaintiff's contention that Higginbottom established that Arizona allows for promissory estoppel claims after the enactment of the EPA.42 Rather, the court concluded that plaintiff's "promissory estoppel claim would allow an end-run around the legislature's efforts to discourage lawsuits against employers and create new avenues of employment litigation."43
Nevertheless, some jurisdictions to consider the issue have held that a plaintiff may recover under a promissory estoppel theory when the plaintiff has reasonably relied upon a prospective employer's promise of future at-will employment if the plaintiff incurred reliance damages as a result of such reliance.44
--------
Notes:
[39] No. 1 CA-CV 07-0628, 2008 WL 2406138 (Ariz. App. June 23, 2008.
[40] Id. at *3, ¶ 16.
[41] No. 1 CV 08-0012, 2008 WL 5264641 (Ariz. App. Dec. 18, 2008).
[42] Id. at *1, ¶ 5.
[43] Id. at *2, ¶ 6.
[44] Bower v....
