Legal Opinion

Fitzmaurice v. Van Vlaanderen MacHine Co.

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided February 8, 1971PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Per curiam

This matter involves an alleged breach of contract for professional services. The plaintiff, Richard J.' Eitzmaurice, a business consultant specializing in marketing and sales, entered into an employment contract with the defendant, Van Vlaanderen Machine Company (hereafter defendant), a manufacturer of printing presses, to provide business diagnosis and interim management for one year at $52,000. The terms of the contract which were embodied in a letter from plaintiff to defendant contained the following provision:

* * * I have agreed to release you from this contract three months from this…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Lockwood Manufacturing Co. v. Mason Regulator Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1903
  2. American Music Stores v. KusselCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1916
  3. Hummel v. SternAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897
  4. Patterson v. Alabama Vermiculite Corp.District Court, W.D. South Carolina · 1957
  5. Meyers v. PotokerSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1925

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Amfac, Inc. v. Waikiki Beachcomber Investment Co.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1992
  2. Navarro v. George Koch & Sons, Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1986
  3. AMERICAN ASSOC. UNIV. PROF v. Bloomfield CollegeNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1975
  4. Pace v. HymasIdaho Supreme Court · 1986
  5. Feldman v. Lederle LaboratoriesSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1993

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API