Costello v. Siems-Carey Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action transferred to the district court for Ramsey county to recover $12,10 7.75 for breach of contract of employment. The answer was a general denial. The case was tried before Dickson, J., who when plaintiff rested granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the action. From an order denying his motion for a new trial, plaintiff appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtHallam, J.
Defendant is a Minnesota corporation, engaged in business as railroad construction contractor. W. F. Carey is its vice-president. Its principal office is in St. Paul. Plaintiff was in defendant’s employ for a number of years as superintendent of construction. In March, 1912, defendant wrote plaintiff as follows: “The way things are lining up I think we have cut out a piece of work for you and Mike on the Grand Trunk, if the necessary financial arrangements between yourselves and ourselves can be made. * * * Siems-Carey Company, Per W. F. Carey.”
Later in 1912 Carey in a conversation again…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Sanders v. MunsonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1896
- Salmon v. BoykinCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1887
- McCormick v. LoudenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1896
- Sample v. PickardMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
3Cited by3 opinions
- Mahnke v. Northwest Publications, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1968
- Bryngelson v. Minnesota Valley Breeders Assn.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1962
- Mahnke v. Northwest Publications, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1968