Opinion
278 A.D. 854 104 N.Y.S.2d 484 HAROLD S. MILLER, Respondent, v. BURLINGTON MILLS RIBBON CORP., Appellant. Supreme Court of New York, Second Department. May 21, 1951
In an action for damages based upon the alleged wrongful dismissal of respondent in breach of a contract of employment, appeal is taken from an order denying defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings, under rule 112 of the Rules of Civil Practice, on the ground that the alleged contract of employment is void under the Statute of Frauds. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and the motion granted, with $10 costs. The note or memorandum upon which respondent relies evidences only a hiring at will ( Martin v. New York Life Ins. Co., 148 N.Y. 117; Watson v. Gugino, 204 N.Y. 535; Bulkley v. Kaolin Products Co., 187 A.D. 103; Rider v. Standard Safety Razor Corp., 237 A.D. 853), and recourse may not be had to parol evidence to establish a different intention of the parties (Drake v. Seaman, 97 N.Y. 230; Matter of Levin, 276 A.D. 739; Brodlie v. Fink, 275 A.D. 1061).
Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Adel, Sneed and MacCrate, JJ., concur.