Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P was an architect and draftsman who applied to D for work. P quoted a rate of $40 per week but was employed at $35 per week. A short time thereafter P informed D that he had other work at $40 per week. D sweet-talked him into staying. About 6 months later, P and D sat and discussed work and D told P that he was going to give P $5 more per week and that next year he would give P a fair share of the profits made as well as his weekly salary if certain old work were completed. P was paid the new salary. The old work was also completed. On election day in November, D requested that all of his employees should work. P told D that he wanted to remain home and attend the election at his village. P did so, and D discharged him. P claims he was ill that day. P went to D and proclaimed his ability to work, and D denied any agreement with P. P sought to recover lost wages and lost profit sharing and sued for $1,680. P was the only witness to testify at trial, and the complaint was dismissed. P appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.