Legal Opinion

McIntosh v. Murphy

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided May 11, 1970No. 4828PublishedCited by 38 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT BY

LEVINSON, J.

This case involves an oral employment contract which allegedly violates the provision of the Statute of Frauds requiring “any agreement that is not to be performed within one year from the making thereof” to be in writing in order to be enforceable. HRS § 656-1 (5). In this action the plaintiff-employee Dick McIntosh seeks to recover damages from his employer, George Murphy and Murphy Motors, Ltd., for the breach of an alleged one-year oral employment contract.

While the facts are in sharp conflict, it appears that defendant George Murphy was in southern…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Seymour v. OelrichsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
  2. Alaska Airlines, Inc., a Corporation v. Arthur W. StephensonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1954
  3. James Oxley v. Ralston Purina CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1965
  4. Yee Hop v. Young Sak ChoHawaii Supreme Court · 1920
  5. Perreira v. PerreiraHawaii Supreme Court · 1968

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. United Parcel Service Co. v. RickertKentucky Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Klinke v. Famous Recipe Fried Chicken, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1980
  3. Kiely v. St. GermainSupreme Court of Colorado · 1983
  4. Wior v. Anchor Industries, Inc.Indiana Supreme Court · 1996
  5. Farmers Elevator Co. of Elk Point v. LyleSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1976

33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API