Legal Opinion
Auster v. Princess Fabrics, Inc.
City of New York Municipal Court
Decided September 10, 1940PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtEvans, J.
This is a motion to compel a reply to the three separate defenses. As to the third defense, the motion is withdrawn by the briefs.
The complaint is for breach of an oral contract of employment. The term of the contract is from February 14, 1940, to January 4, 1941, and the compensation forty dollars a week. The plaintiff was discharged April 13, 1940. Damages are sought for the unlawful discharge.
The answer sets up new matter by way of avoidance, and the facts alleged are that, after the discharge, plaintiff brought an action in the Small Claims Part of the Municipal Court for forty dollars.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hudson v. Yonkers Fruit Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1932
- Waldron v. HendricksonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899
- Dittenfass v. HorsleyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1916
3Cited by3 opinions
- Chang v. ChiarielloCivil Court of the City of New York · 1982
- Cook v. WozniakIndiana Court of Appeals · 1986
- Cook v. WozniakIndiana Court of Appeals · 1986