Bjorkman v. Arctic Cat, Inc.

Karl Bjorkman (plaintiff) worked as a sales manager for Arctic Cat, Inc. (defendant) in Thief River Falls, Minnesota. In May 2007, Arctic Cat announced plans to relocate positions from Thief River Falls to Plymouth. In July 2008, Chris Twomey and Terry Blount, Arctic Cat’s CEO and human-resources (HR) vice president, met with Bjorkman and offered him three options: (1) relocate to Plymouth with a $10,000 salary increase, (2) seek another position at the Thief River Falls facility, or (3) resign and receive a severance package. Arctic Cat confirmed its offer in writing and asked Bjorkman to respond by August 8. On August 8, Bjorkman asked Arctic Cat to increase the salary offered under option 1. Blount replied that Arctic Cat would not increase compensation and requested that Bjorkman respond “ASAP.” Bjorkman did not. Ultimately, Arctic Cat’s relocation plan did not proceed as expected. On January 8, 2009, Twomey met with Bjorkman and offered two options: (1) relocate to Plymouth with a $90,000 salary or (2) remain in Thief River Falls in his current position with a 3 percent retroactive raise. Severance was not mentioned. The next day, Bjorkman met with an HR manager to discuss resignation. The HR manager told Bjorkman that he was probably not eligible for severance but that he should check with Blount. He did not. Nevertheless, on January 12, Bjorkman submitted a resignation letter stating that he was accepting the severance package. On January 16, Blount informed Bjorkman that no severance option was available. Bjorkman sued Arctic Cat for breach of contract. After a bench trial, the trial court entered judgment for Arctic Cat, finding that the severance offer had been modified or revoked before Bjorkman’s purported acceptance. Bjorkman appealed.