The corporation’s vice president complained to the board of directors about what she perceived to be potential violations of state and federal antitrust laws by the corporation. The CEO, on learning of this, fired the vice president, who sued claiming that termination of her at-will employment amounted to violation of a clear mandate of public policy. While conceding that state and federal antitrust laws are significant expressions of public policy, the company contended that for the vice president to win her wrongful discharge lawsuit, she must be able to prove that the firm actually was guilty of antitrust violations.

Is the company correct in taking this position?

Or should it be enough that the vice president can prove she held a good faith belief in the existence of such violations at the time that she circumvented the

“chain of command” and complained to the board about the perceived violations? See Murcott v. Best Western International, Inc. [9 P.3d 1088 (Arizona App. 2000)].