Legal Opinion

Naylor v. Fall River Iron Works Co.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided September 15, 1875PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Contract on an account annexed, for services in the defendant’s mill from May 31 to June 23, 1873. Trial in the Superior Court, before Pitman, J., who allowed a bill of exceptious in substance as follows: The defendant admitted that the plaintiff worked for it the dumber of days and for the price claimed, but alleged that, at the time of entering the defendant’s employment, the plaintiff signed the following agreement, which was read over and explained to him at the time of…

Read the full summary

Contract on an account annexed, for services in the defendant’s mill from May 31 to June 23, 1873. Trial in the Superior Court, before Pitman, J., who allowed a bill of exceptious in substance as follows: The defendant admitted that the plaintiff worked for it the dumber of days and for the price claimed, but alleged that, at the time of entering the defendant’s employment, the plaintiff signed the following agreement, which was read over and explained to him at the time of signing: “I, the undersigned, employee of the F. R. I. Works Co., agree that in case I intend to leave their employment…

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court.

The construction of this contract must be that the forfeiture is incurred by the fact of leaving the employment without previous notice. If the plaintiff left his work wilfully, without sufficient cause to justify or excuse his conduct, under such circumstances and in such manner that the defendant, considering the nature of the work and its relations to the other *319operations of. the defendant’s business, might fairly and reasonably regard his leaving and continued absence as an abandonment of his work, rendering it necessary to procure another person to supply the place, it was a…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. Nevins v. WardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1946
  2. Harrington v. Fall River Iron Works Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875
  3. Heber v. United States Flax Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Rhode Island · 1881

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

Powered by the Exa API