Savannah, Florida & Western Railway Co. v. Willett

43 Fla. 311
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided June 15, 1901·Published·Cited by 18 cases

Opinion

Hocker, C.,

(After'stating the facts.)

The demurrer ,to the declaration contained, among others, the grounds, first, that such facts as are necessary to a recovery are not stated,“ fourth, that the terms of employment, whether by the'day, year or any other specified time, are'not stated; fifth, that it is not stated whether the plaintiff was to be paid monthly, quarterly or yearly. These grounds present the question upon which the case will be disposed 1 of.

A declaration ''upon which ¡a plaintiff founds 'his right of recovery must allege every fact that is essential to his right of action. South Florida Tel. Co. v. Maloney, 34 Fla. 338, 16 South. Rep. 280. The declaration, while alleging that plaintiff “was agreed to be employed by the proper officer of the defendant corporation,” and that “the defendant informed the plaintiff that it could give him employment as conductor,” no where states the duration of his employment, nor are^the facts alleged sufficient to infer it. 'From the allegations in the declaration it must be taken as an employment -at will, terminable by either party. No action can be maintained for the breach of a contract to employ, .unless there is some stipulation as to the length of time for which the employment shall continué. Blaisdel v. Lewis, 32 Maine 515; De Briar v. Minturn, 1 Cal. 450. If a term of employment be discretionary with either party, or be indefinite, either party [315]*315may terminate it at any time. Wood’s Law of Master & Servant (2nd ed.) 133; also Ibid. §81; Water Commissioners of Jersey City v. Brown, 32 N. J. Law 504; Shaw v. Woodbury Glass Works, 52 N. J. Law, 7, 18 Atl. Rep. 696.

The order of the court overruling the demurrer to the decision was erroneous. The judgment is reversed dnd the cause remanded.

Maxwell, C., and Glen, C., concurred.

Per Curiam.

The foregoing opinion 'has been examined by the court and is hereby approved and adopted and ordered to b'e hied as the opinion of the court in 'said cause.

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

Savannah, Florida & Western Railway Co. v. Willett, 43 Fla. 311 (Fla. 1901).

43 Fla. 311 (Savannah, Florida & Western Railway Co. v. Willett) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

JRD Management Corp. v. Dulin
883 So. 2d 314 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)
Ross v. Twenty-Four Collection, Inc.
617 So. 2d 428 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1993)
Forde v. Royal's, Inc.
537 F. Supp. 1173 (S.D. Florida, 1982)
Rusling v. R. C. A. Service Co.
403 So. 2d 506 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)
Quigley v. Laventhol & Howarth
382 So. 2d 137 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1980)
Sher v. Shower Door Company of America, Ltd.
197 So. 2d 333 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1967)
Russell & Axon v. Handshoe
176 So. 2d 909 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1965)
Hope v. National Airlines
99 So. 2d 244 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1957)
Wynne v. Ludman Corporation
79 So. 2d 690 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1955)
Gelhaus v. Eastern Air Lines, Inc.
194 F.2d 772 (Fifth Circuit, 1952)
Gus' Baths, Inc. v. Lightbown, Et Vir.
160 So. 370 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1935)
Hazen v. Cobb-Vaughan Motor Co.
117 So. 853 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1928)
W., B. A.R.R. Co. v. Moss
96 A. 273 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1915)
McMillan v. Western Union Telegraph Co.
60 Fla. 131 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1910)
Milligan v. Keyser
52 Fla. 331 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1906)