From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kay v. Frick

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 1, 1924
211 App. Div. 809 (N.Y. App. Div. 1924)

Opinion

November, 1924.

Present — Kelly, P.J., Rich, Manning, Kelby and Kapper, JJ.


Judgment of the County Court of Nassau county modified by reducing recovery to $105.16; and as so modified unanimously affirmed, without costs. We are of opinion that the testimony of plaintiff at folios 65-67 of the record established a locus poenitentioe for the defendant, and barred plaintiff from recovering damages for wrongful discharge. ( Heiferman v. Greenhut Cloak Co., 143 N.Y. Supp. 411; affd., 163 App. Div. 939; Connell v. Averill, 8 id. 524.)


Summaries of

Kay v. Frick

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 1, 1924
211 App. Div. 809 (N.Y. App. Div. 1924)
Case details for

Kay v. Frick

Case Details

Full title:LOUIS KAY, Respondent, v. CHILDS FRICK, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Nov 1, 1924

Citations

211 App. Div. 809 (N.Y. App. Div. 1924)

Citing Cases

Karas v. H.R. Laboratories, Inc.

( Marks v. Cowdin, 226 N.Y. 138, 147.) As to damages, the plaintiff, prima facie, was entitled to the stated…

Teich v. Aetna Industrial Corporation

In the aspect of the case most favorable to the plaintiff, if we assume that there was in fact a discharge,…