Legal Opinion

Mook v. Parke

New York Court of Common Pleas

Decided June 4, 1894PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal from city court, general term. Action by William H. Mook against Parke, Davis & Co. to recover damages for wrongful discharge of plaintiff. From a judgment entered of the city court (27 ¡N". Y. Supp. 1134), affirming a judgment entered on a verdict in favor of plaintiff, and an order denying defendant’s motion for a new trial on the minutes, defendant appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtBookstaver, J.

This action was brought to recover damages for the wrongful discharge of the plaintiff, whose testimony was to the effect that he called at the office of the defendant company, dealers in drugs and physicians’ supplies, and asked its manager, one Clay, for employment as a traveling salesman, and was referred by him to one Templeton, who was in the same building, in the office in the rear, and who was represented by Clay as having charge of the salesmen. Clay denied, upon the stand, that he told plaintiff that Templeton had charge of the salesmen; but it is significant that he did not deny…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Sterrett v. . Third National Bank of BuffaloNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
  2. Benesch v. John Hancock Mutual Life InsuranceNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1890
  3. Akersloot v. Second Avenue Railway Co.New York Supreme Court · 1890

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York v. McLaughlinCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1937
  2. Ashner v. AbenheimNew York Supreme Court · 1897

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

Powered by the Exa API