Judges: Gerard
Filed Date: 2/7/1908
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/12/2024
The defendant employed the plaintiff as an actor under a written contract which contained the following clause in paragraph 2:
“And it is further contracted and agreed by and between the parties to this instrument that in case the services so rendered by the party of the second •part shall not in the estimation of the party of the first part be satisfactorily rendered, the party of the first part may cancel this contract and release himrself from the terms thereof. This to refer to rehearsals, as well as any performance.”
The employment was for the theatrical season of 1906-07. On November 10, 1906, defendant sent plaintiff a notice stating:
“According to the terms of the contract now existing between you and the Shubert Theatrical Company, this will serve as your two weeks’ notice, ending Saturday night, November 24, 1906.”
Plaintiff was paid a salary of $100 a week, the price stipulated in -the contract, down to November 24, 1906. He received a second notice from the defendant, which he admitted he received on or prior to November 24th, as follows:
“Dear Sir: Pursuant to the terms of paragraph second of the contract •made with you, dated July 18, 1906, we hereby desire to notify you that your •services are not satisfactorily rendered, and we hereby cancel the contract between you and ourselves.
“Yours truly, Shubert Theatrical Company.”
The contract in question did not contain any clause providing for a -two weeks’ notice. Where a contract contains a clause that the services are to be satisfactory to the employer, the right to discharge if the services are not satisfactory to him, if the employment is of the •class involving taste, fancy, interest, and personal satisfaction or judgment, and if the employer discharges the employe, the question whether not the services of the employé are satisfactory is to be determined
Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.
GIEDERSEEEVE, P. J., concurs. SEABURY, J., taking no part.