Stuppard-Wilson

**Court Ruling Summary: Employee vs. Medpace, Inc.** **What Happened:** An employee sued Medpace, Inc., claiming the company broke their employment contract. The employee also made additional claims arguing the company unfairly benefited from their work (unjust enrichment) and failed to keep promises made to them (promissory estoppel). Medpace asked the court to throw out the entire lawsuit before it could proceed to trial. **What the Court Decided:** The court issued a mixed ruling on November 7, 2025. The judge allowed the main breach of contract claim to continue, meaning the employee can pursue their argument that Medpace violated their employment agreement. However, the court dismissed the two backup claims for unjust enrichment and promissory estoppel, ruling these alternative arguments couldn't proceed alongside the contract claim. **Why This Matters for Workers:** This ruling shows that employees can still successfully bring breach of contract claims against their employers when they have valid employment agreements. However, it also demonstrates that courts may limit which legal theories employees can use simultaneously. Workers should focus on having clear, written employment contracts and understand that their strongest legal position typically comes from specific contractual violations rather than general fairness arguments.