Nuckolls v. College of Physicians & Surgeons
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco, and from an order denying a new trial. J. M. Seawell, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtKerrigan, J.
This is an action for damages alleged to have been suffered by plaintiff by reason of his discharge from defendant’s employ. Plaintiff, who is a dentist, was employed by defendant as a demonstrator of operative dentistry for one year, beginning July 1, 1902, at a salary of $50 per month. Under the terms of the contract he was to give his entire time every afternoon from 1 to 5 o’clock (except Sundays) to the service of the defendant. October 4, 1902, plaintiff was discharged. During the remaining nine months of the term of the employment, both in the forenoon and the afternoon, the plaintiff…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Cashman v. HarrisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Jaffray v. KingCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1871
- Gates v. School DistrictSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1893
- Toplitz v. UllmanNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1892
- Kyle & Co. v. PouSupreme Court of Georgia · 1895
3Cited by11 opinions
- Steelduct Co. v. Henger-Seltzer Co.California Supreme Court · 1945
- Taboada v. Sociedad Espanola De Beneficencia MutuaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
- State v. MasseySupreme Court of Missouri · 1918
- Pecarovich v. BeckerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
- Beard v. BeardOregon Supreme Court · 1913
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.