Legal Opinion
Meyerson v. Hart
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided February 16, 1909No. 140PublishedCited by 2 opinions
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United Stales for the Eastern District of New York.
1Opinion of the Court
COXE, Circuit Judge.
The complainant alleges that the defendants, having employed the plaintiff for the term of one year from December 36, 1905, at $50 a week, on March 9, 1906, refused to permit him longer to perform the terms of the contract, to his damage in the sum of $2,050.
The defendants insist that the plaintiff refused to perform the work assigned to him, pursuant to the contract of employment.
*966So far as the question in controversy is concerned this contract is brief, clear, complete and free from ambiguity. It is as follows:
“Chicago, Illinois, Dec. 19th, 1905.
“Hart, Sehaffner and Marx…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Thomas v. . ScuttNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Brantingham v. . HuffNew York Court of Appeals · 1903
- Violette v. RiceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1899
- Development Co. of America v. KingCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1908
3Cited by2 opinions
- Development Co. of America v. KingCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1909
- Guardian Trust Co. v. BauereisenCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1936