DIXIE GLASS CO., INC. v. Pollak

Texas Supreme Court

DIXIE GLASS CO., INC. v. Pollak

347 S.W.2d 596, 162 Tex. 440, 91 A.L.R. 2d 681, 4 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 558, 1961 Tex. LEXIS 592

Texas Supreme Court·Decided June 21, 1961·No. A-8209·Published·Cited by 34 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The Court of Civil Appeals has held that where an employer wrongfully breaches a contract of employment prior to the time it has been completely performed, the employee is not limited to damages accruing to the date of trial but may recover in one action his damages for the full term. 341 S.W. 2d 530. We approve this holding for the reasons stated by the Court of Civil Appeals in its opinion, although it is contrary 'to statements made in Lichtenstein v. Brooks, 75 Tex. 196, 12 S.W. 975; Niles v. Persons, Tex. Civ. App., 239 S.W. 2d 740 (no writ); Golden Rod Mills v. Green, Tex. Civ. App., 230 S.W. 1089 (wr. dis.); and Louisiana Rio Grande Canal Co. v. Quinn, Tex. Civ. App., 161 S.W. 375 (no writ). The points of error brought forward by the parties afford no basis for disturbing the judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals reversing and remanding the cause for a new trial, and each application for writ of error is refused, no reversible error.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The Court of Civil Appeals has held that where an employer wrongfully breaches a contract of employment prior to the time it has been completely performed, the employee is not limited to damages accruing to the date of trial but may recover in one action his damages for the full term. 341 S.W. 2d 530. We approve this holding for the reasons stated by the Court of Civil Appeals in its opinion, although it is contrary 'to statements made in Lichtenstein v. Brooks, 75 Tex. 196, 12 S.W. 975; Niles v. Persons, Tex. Civ. App., 239 S.W. 2d 740 (no writ); Golden Rod Mills v. Green, Tex. Civ. App., 230 S.W. 1089 (wr. dis.); and Louisiana Rio Grande Canal Co. v. Quinn, Tex. Civ. App., 161 S.W. 375 (no writ). The points of error brought forward by the parties afford no basis for disturbing the judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals reversing and remanding the cause for a new trial, and each application for writ of error is refused, no reversible error.

DIXIE GLASS CO., INC. v. Pollak, 347 S.W.2d 596, 162 Tex. 440, 91 A.L.R. 2d 681, 4 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 558, 1961 Tex. LEXIS 592 (Tex. 1961).

Pincite

347 S.W.2d 596 (DIXIE GLASS CO., INC. v. Pollak) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related