business law home work

Oker was employed as a VP of a rental car company. At the trial in this matter it stipulated to that Oker's performance in Seattle, the Western Region was excellent even in a depressed economic period. Oker's West Region was the only region growing and making a profit. The NE Region was doing badly, the rental company president asked Oker to take over that region. Oker was reluctant, because he and his family liked living in S.F., had developed a good "team" in W. Region, he felt secure in his position, and feared the politics of the NE Region. He agreed to transfer only after Economy General Manager orally told him, "Unless you screw up badly, no way you are going to get fired�you will never get hurt here in this company." Oker transferred and did a commendable job in the NE Region. Approximately one year later, at age 47, Oker was fired w/o cause and sued for breach of an oral lifetime contract. The company asserted the Statute of Frauds. Who wins?  

formet as (IRAC)

issue 

rule

analysis

conclusion