Legal Opinion
Stancil v. Mergenthaler Linotype Co.
District Court, D. Hawaii
Decided February 29, 1984No. Civ. 82-0023PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT
FONG, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Jack R. Stancil was employed by Defendant MERGENTHALER LINOTYPE COMPANY as a salesman for six months when he was terminated due to poor sales as a result of a general decline in business conditions. Plaintiff is suing Defendant in contract for an alleged breach of a “long-term employment agreement” and in tort for misrepresentation and damage to reputation. Defendant moves for Summary Judgment because: (1) the employment agreement at issue was for an indefinite duration and…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Day & Zimmermann, Inc. v. ChallonerSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Parnar v. Americana Hotels, Inc.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1982
- Volkswagen Interamericana, S.A. v. Henry RohlsenCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1966
- John T. Stephens v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1975
- Skagway City School Board v. DavisAlaska Supreme Court · 1975
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Redgrave v. Boston Symphony Orchestra, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1988
- Abbott v. United Venture Capital, Inc.District Court, D. Nevada · 1989
- Klayman v. Judicial Watch, Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 2017
- Morishige v. Spencecliff Corp.District Court, D. Hawaii · 1989
- Hubbard Business Plaza v. Lincoln Liberty Life InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 1986
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.