Hauser v. Watson
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
CAYTON, Chief Judge.
The question on this appeal is whether the trial judge was justified in taking from the jury plaintiff’s claim for salesman’s commissions and limiting his recovery as a matter of law to $25 instead of a much larger sum he claimed.
Plaintiff went to work for defendant company as an automotive salesman in mid-June 1944 under a verbal understand*699ing with the company’s branch manager, E.T. Rayner. A week or so later Rayner handed plaintiff a copy of a letter written by him to the company’s main office, reciting that plaintiff had been employed at $300 per month plus two percent…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Littell v. Evening Star Newspaper Co.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1941
- Canal Co. v. RaySupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Nickel v. ScottDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1948
- J. E. Hanger, Inc., of Washington, D. C. v. FitzsimmonsDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1921
- Newcomb v. York Ice Machinery Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1932
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Moody v. BogueCourt of Appeals of Iowa · 1981
- National School Studios, Inc. v. MealeyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1999
- Summers v. Ralston Purina Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1954
- Gupta v. 2ndwave LLCDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2026