VAN RAAS v. ROSENBAUM-GRINELL, INC.


23 Misc.2d 919 (1960)

Rhyissa Van Raas, Respondent, v. Rosenbaum-Grinell, Inc., Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department.

February 4, 1960.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Simon S. Katz for appellant. Monroe J. Winsten and Albert A. Juron for respondent.

Concur — HECHT, J. P., AURELIO and TILZER, JJ.


Per Curiam.

Plaintiff was not entitled to recover the item of $37.50 for advertising costs for a new position, since, in any event, same might have been incurred in advertising for a new position when her employment terminated at the end of the stated season, in December.

The judgment should be modified by reducing the recovery to the sum of $780, with interest and costs thereon and as modified affirmed, with $25 costs to plaintiff-respondent.

...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases