Opinion
39869.
DECIDED APRIL 9, 1963. REHEARING DENIED MAY 1, 1963.
Action for commissions. Fulton Civil Court. Before Judge Smith.
Franklin B. Anderson, for plaintiff in error.
T. Blake Jackson, contra.
1. A petition seeking recovery of commissions under a contract of employment, which sets out an enforceable contract between the parties and alleges that the defendant is indebted to the plaintiff for a stated sum due thereunder which it fails and refuses to pay although demand has been made, is not subject to a motion to dismiss on the sole ground that no cause is set forth. Keith v. Darby, 104 Ga. App. 624 (2) ( 122 S.E.2d 463).
2. A provision of such contract reciting: "The decisions of the president or vice-president, sales or general sales manager of the corporation shall be accepted as conclusive and final in connection with any dispute whatsoever which may arise in connection with this agreement" cannot be given any legal effect. "[A] general agreement to arbitrate all questions which may arise in the execution of a contract, both as to liability and loss, should be treated as against public policy and void, as an attempt to oust the courts of jurisdiction." State Hwy. Dept. v. MacDougald Const. Co., 189 Ga. 490, 504 ( 6 S.E.2d 570). See also Parsons v. Ambos, 121 Ga. 98 (1) ( 48 S.E. 696). Since such a provision is void as against public policy it does not render the contract unenforceable in the courts.
The trial court erred in dismissing the petition on motion.
Judgment reversed. Felton, C. J., and Eberhardt, J., concur.
DECIDED APRIL 9, 1963 — REHEARING DENIED MAY 1, 1963.
Roland Gettys filed an action in the Civil Court of Fulton County which, as finally amended, alleged in substance that plaintiff entered into a contract of employment with the defendant Mack Trucks, Inc., on April 2, 1956; that he worked continuously under said contract until November 15, 1958, at which time defendant was indebted to him for commissions earned thereunder in the sum of $7,480.57; that it has failed and refused to pay although demand has been made; that plaintiff resigned on January 1, 1960, and that defendant accepted his resignation but refused, after demand, to pay the commissions earned under the contract. The contract, which is attached to the petition, provides that plaintiff is employed as a salesman of motor vehicles thereunder but that the contract may be terminated by 24 hours notice by either party and the method of settlement of accounts upon termination; it provides for the payment of commissions under various circumstances, for chargebacks of commissions in case of repossession, that the decisions of certain officers of the corporation shall be accepted as conclusive and final in connection with any disputes arising in connection with the agreement, and that no modification of the agreement shall be binding unless approved in writing by an authorized official of the corporation.
The trial court sustained a motion to dismiss the amended petition on the ground that no cause of action was set forth, and this judgment is assigned as error.