Skip to main content

Turner v. Wyandotte County, Kansas, Unified Government of

D. Kan.March 2, 2020No. 2:18-cv-02202
Defendant WinSouthwestern Bell
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Nature of Suit — the legal category of the dispute
Civil Rights: Jobs
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Unknown
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal
State
Kansas

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Outcome

The court affirmed the Board of Review's decision that appellants were not eligible for unemployment benefits because they voluntarily accepted a voluntary severance package without good cause connected with their work, despite having suitable positions available and no imminent danger of job loss.

What This Ruling Means

**Turner v. Wyandotte County Case Summary** This case involved employees who took voluntary severance packages from their employer, Southwestern Bell, and then applied for unemployment benefits. The workers had been offered the option to leave with a severance package, even though their jobs weren't being eliminated and they could have stayed in their current positions or moved to other suitable roles within the company. The court sided with the unemployment board's decision to deny benefits to these employees. The court found that because the workers voluntarily chose to take the severance packages when they had other job options available at the company, they weren't entitled to unemployment compensation. The key factor was that they left by choice rather than being forced out due to poor working conditions or job elimination. **What This Means for Workers:** This ruling shows that taking a voluntary buyout or severance package can disqualify you from receiving unemployment benefits, even if your employer offers one. If you have the option to stay in your current job or transfer to another position with your employer, choosing to leave voluntarily with a severance package may mean you won't qualify for unemployment insurance. Workers should carefully consider this trade-off before accepting such offers.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.