Allen v. Mutual Compress Co.
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the City Court of Montgomery. Tried before the Hon. Ttiomas M. Arrington. This action was brought by Osborn Allen, the appellant, against the Mutual Compress Company; and counted on a contract, which had been entered into by the plaintiff and the defendant.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the City Court of Montgomery. Tried before the Hon. Ttiomas M. Arrington. This action was brought by Osborn Allen, the appellant, against the Mutual Compress Company; and counted on a contract, which had been entered into by the plaintiff and the defendant. The plaintiff was employed by the defendant under a written contract, which, among other provisions, contained the provision which is copied in the opinion, by which the plaintiff guaranteed satisfaction to his employer . After working .a while the defendant paid the plaintiff in full for the time of actual service, and…
1Opinion of the CourtColeman, J.
The questions presented in the record for consideration arise from the construction of a provision in a written contract of employment.' The defendant employed the plaintiff for a period of five months, at two dollars per day, to sew and tie cotton bales for the compress. After serving a little over one month, the defendant paid the plaintiff for the time of service rendered, and discharged him, claiming that under the contract it had the right to discharge the defendant whenever it became dissatisfied with the services of the defendant, and that it was the sole judge of the sufficiency of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Jones v. Graham & Morton Transportation Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1883
3Cited by5 opinions
- Hazen v. Cobb-Vaughan Motor Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1928
- Mackenzie v. MinisSupreme Court of Georgia · 1909
- Hardison v. A. H. Belo Corp.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1952
- Schleicher, Schumm & Co. v. Montgomery Light Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1896
- Starkweather v. Emerson Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1906