From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wieland v. Willcox

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 1, 1899
40 App. Div. 213 (N.Y. App. Div. 1899)

Opinion

May Term, 1899.

John U. Shorter, for the appellant.

John H. Parsons, for the respondent.


The previous recovery by the plaintiff for damages for a wrongful discharge from his employment, is a bar to the maintenance of the present action. It is settled law in this State that upon such a discharge the only action the employee can bring is for the breach of the contract, and not one for wages on the theory of constructive service. The breach being single, but a single action can be brought on it, and in that action the plaintiff must recover all his damages. ( Howard v. Daly, 61 N.Y. 362; Weed v. Burt, 78 id. 191; Basset v. French, 31 N Y Supp. 667; Waldron v. Hendrickson, ante, p. 7.)

The order appealed from should be affirmed, with costs.

All concurred.

Order affirmed, with costs.


Summaries of

Wieland v. Willcox

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 1, 1899
40 App. Div. 213 (N.Y. App. Div. 1899)
Case details for

Wieland v. Willcox

Case Details

Full title:HENRY L. WIELAND, Appellant, v . EDWIN B. WILLCOX, Respondent

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

Date published: May 1, 1899

Citations

40 App. Div. 213 (N.Y. App. Div. 1899)
57 N.Y.S. 1038

Citing Cases

Pakas v. Hollingshead

A wrongful discharge from employment under a contract, however, is considered a general breach of the…