Hogg v. Stortz

2 E.D. Smith 192
CourtNew York Court of Common Pleas
DecidedNovember 15, 1853
StatusPublished

This text of 2 E.D. Smith 192 (Hogg v. Stortz) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Common Pleas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hogg v. Stortz, 2 E.D. Smith 192 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1853).

Opinion

By the Court. Ingraham, First J.

All the cases in this state establish the view taken by the defendant of this contract, viz: That payment was not to be made until its expiration. (See 12 J. R. 165; 19 Id. 337; 8 Cowen, 63; 4 Denio, 121.)

If this he so, then the plaintiff’s son had no good cause for leaving the defendant’s employment; and having so abandoned his services, nothing can be recovered for his past labors. (See cases above cited.)

The rule may he a hard one, and is different in some of the other states; but the contract should he made specific in requiring payment before its expiration, to avoid the difficulty.

Judgment reversed.

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

Related

Monell v. Burns
4 Denio 121 (New York Supreme Court, 1847)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2 E.D. Smith 192, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hogg-v-stortz-nyctcompl-1853.