Legal Opinion

Fischhoff v. Adels-Loeb, Inc.

New York City Court

Decided December 15, 1947PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtHerzog, J.

This is a motion for summary judgment under rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice. On March 30, 1944, the plaintiff and defendant entered into a written agreement whereby the defendant employed the plaintiff as a duly qualified optometrist in personal attendance at the optical department in defendant’s store in Albany, New York. The contract provided that it should run from April 1, 1944, to March 31, 1945. The agreed salary was $125 per week and, in addition thereto, 25% of the net profits of the department for the year. There are no provisions regarding vacations or sick leave in the con*222tr…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Wolfe v. . HowesNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
  2. Clark v. . GilbertNew York Court of Appeals · 1863
  3. Wilson v. SmithSupreme Court of Alabama · 1895
  4. Fahy v. NorthNew York Supreme Court · 1855
  5. Reiter v. Standard Scale & Supply Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1908

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Augusta v. John Hancock Mutual Life InsuranceCity of New York Municipal Court · 1958

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

Powered by the Exa API