Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

F. C. Kain v. Armour and Company

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Decided February 23, 1966No. 22268_1Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

JONES, Senior Judge,**

concurring in part and dissenting in part:

Appellant, F. C. Kain, entered the service of Armour and Company as an employee in 1933 when he was 25 years of age. He worked for Armour in various capacities until August 1, 1960, when he was 52 years of age. At the time he entered appellee’s service he signed a written agreement which stipulated that the employment “may be terminated at the pleasure of either employer or employee without previous notice.” At that time the company had a pension plan to which Kain contributed throughout the years of his employment.

On August 1,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

Story Parchment Co. v. Paterson Parchment Paper Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1931
Gediman v. Anheuser Busch, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1962
L. J. Hablas v. Armour and Company, a Foreign CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1959
Vernon L. Haag v. International Telephone and Telegraph Corporation, a Maryland CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1963
Mullaly v. Carlisle Chemical Works, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1960