1. Why did Melott believe that she had an implied

1. Why did Melott believe that she had an implied contract with ACC? What would she have had to show in order to prove that the implied contract existed?
2. If Melott had not been fired from ACC’s Ohio facility, would her employment at the Florida facility have been guaranteed? Why or why not?
3. What can companies do to avoid breach of implied contract cases?

Melott asserts that ACC breached its contractual obligations by wrongfully terminating her employment with the company. It is undisputed that there is no express written contract that alters Melott’s status as an at-will employee. The question is whether the parties intended and was bound by an implied contract that altered the terms of discharge. To prevail on a breach of contract claim under Ohio law, Melott must show: (1) the existence of a binding contract, (2) performance by Melott, (3) breach by ACC, and (4) damage to Melott as a result of ACC’s breach. To establish the existence of an implied contract, an atwill employee must prove each element necessary to form a contract. A plaintiff must show mutual assent (i.e., offer and acceptance) and consideration. The parties must have a meeting of the minds to limit the terms of discharge, and the contract must be definite as to its essential terms.