CONTRACTS - DEFINITENESS - EFFECT OF PROVISION IN EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT FOR TERMINATION ONLY BY MUTUAL CONSENT

Authors

Michigan Law Review, University of Michigan Law School

Abstract

Plaintiff entered into a written contract with defendant whereby defendant was to employ plaintiff as a salesman and plaintiff was to receive a salary of seven per cent of the annual profits of defendant's business with a guaranteed drawing account of forty-five dollars per week. The agreement provided that it should be terminable only by the mutual consent of both parties and contained no other stipulation for duration. Plaintiff was employed under the agreement from August 1912 until April 1933, when he was discharged because of a decrease in defendant's business. Held, that the contract was too indefinite to afford any reasonably certain basis for the assessment of damages and was therefore void. Mallory v. Jack, 281 Mich. 156, 274 N. W. 746 (1937).

Recommended Citation

Michigan Law Review, CONTRACTS - DEFINITENESS - EFFECT OF PROVISION IN EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT FOR TERMINATION ONLY BY MUTUAL CONSENT, 36 Mich. L. Rev. 658 (1938).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol36/iss4/11