H. S. Kerbaugh, Inc. v. Gray
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. Action by William B. Gray against H. S. Kerbaugh, Incorporated. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the Court
WARD, Circuit Judge.
H. S: Kerbaugh, Incorporated, the defendant below, had a contract with the state of New York for the construction of a section of the Catskill Aqueduct. Gray, the plaintiff below, was its general superintendent at a salary of $350 a month. In May, 1910, the work was dragging, and the foremen were dissatisfied with their pay. The plaintiff reported this to Kerbaugh, the president of the defendant, who authorized him to raise the pay of three foremen and to promise them in addition a bonus equal to their monthly pay from May 1st to the end of the concrete season. Whether…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Martin v. New York Life InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1895
3Cited by17 opinions
- Hercules Powder Co. v. Brookfield.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1949
- Tage E. Pearson v. Youngstown Sheet and Tube Company, an Ohio CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1964
- Schofield v. Zion's Co-Op. Mercantile InstitutionUtah Supreme Court · 1934
- Barger v. General Electric Co.District Court, W.D. Virginia · 1984
- Long v. ForbesWyoming Supreme Court · 1943
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.