## Facts

- Three female flight attendants worked for an Illinois charter airline.
- The attendants alleged sexual harassment and age-based comments created a hostile work environment and forced their resignations (constructive discharge).
- The attendants resigned together shortly before a scheduled charter flight for a major client.
- The employer and two pilot-shareholders (including the company president) were sued under Title VII and the ADEA.
- The employer asserted counterclaims seeking substantial damages, alleging the resignations caused lost business and breach of charter obligations.

## Issues

1. Whether individual employees/supervisors may be held personally liable under Title VII and the ADEA.
2. Whether the employer stated viable Illinois-law counterclaims for (a) tortious interference with contract, (b) breach of employment contract, (c) promissory estoppel, and (d) equitable estoppel based on the attendants’ abrupt resignations.

## Decision

- The court dismissed the Title VII and ADEA claims against the two individual defendants in their personal capacities.
- The court dismissed all four counterclaims for failure to state a claim.
- The discrimination claims against the employer entity were not resolved on the merits by this order.

## Legal Principles

- Title VII and the ADEA impose liability on the employer, not individual employees, despite statutory references to an employer’s “agents.”
- Illinois tortious interference with contract requires allegations supporting intentional and unjustified inducement of a breach; a resignation alone, without facts showing a purpose to induce breach, is insufficient.
- At-will employment in Illinois may be terminated by either party at any time absent a definite-term contract; resigning from at-will employment does not constitute breach of contract.
- Illinois promissory estoppel requires an unambiguous promise and reasonable reliance; an at-will employment relationship, without clear assurances of continued employment, does not supply the required promise.
- Illinois equitable estoppel requires a material misrepresentation or concealment and detrimental reliance; continuing to work and then resigning from at-will employment, without specific misleading statements or concealment, is insufficient.

## Conclusion

The court removed the individual defendants from the federal discrimination claims and rejected the employer’s attempt to recast the attendants’ at-will resignations as tort, contract, or estoppel liability, leaving only the discrimination claims against the employer to proceed.


Straka v. Francis, 867 F. Supp. 767 (N.D. Ill. 1994)