Rosenberger

Rosenberger v. Pacific Coast Railway Co.

Good Law
111 Cal. 313·1896 Cal. LEXIS 581·43 P. 963
Supreme Court of CaliforniaFebruary 21, 1896L. A. No. 86California1,207 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

This cause was tried by the court and a jury, the plaintiff had judgment, and the defendant appeals therefrom and from an order denying a new trial.

The plaintiff claimed that he was employed by the defendant as an accountant for the period of one year commencing November 24,1893, at a salary of eighteen hundred dollars per annum, payable in monthly installments of one hundred and fifty dollars, and that he was discharged without cause March 24, 1894. This action was commenced July 17,1894, to recover three months’ salary, from March 24 to June 24, 1893, amounting to four hundred and fifty dollars, and for that sum he recovered judgment.

The defense was that the employment was not for any definite time, and that his discharge was justifiable because of his failure to give bond for the faithful discharge of his duties.

Prior to the employment in question plaintiff was employed in a similar capacity in the offices of the Union Pacific Railway at Omaha, and had made an application for employment to the auditor of the Oregon Improve *316 ment Company, with which company defendant is connected. 0. 0. Johnson, defendant’s superintendent, wrote plaintiff November' 4, 1893, to know…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.