Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

BUONAIUTO v. ALFRED ANGELO (09/11/69)

SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA


decided: September 11, 1969.

BUONAIUTO
v.
ALFRED ANGELO, INC., APPELLANT

Appeal from order and judgment of Court of Common Pleas No. 1 of Philadelphia County, Sept. T., 1963, No. 1899, in case of Louis J. Buonaiuto v. Alfred Angelo, Inc.

COUNSEL

Herman Lazarus, with him Lazarus and Maxmin, for appellant.

Tom P. Monteverde, with him Edward I. Weisberg, David N. Feldman, and Schnader, Harrison, Segal & Lewis, for appellee.

Wright, P. J., Watkins, Montgomery, Jacobs, Hoffman, Spaulding, and Cercone, JJ. Dissenting Opinion by Montgomery, J.

Author: Per Curiam

[ 215 Pa. Super. Page 155]

Order and judgment affirmed.

Disposition

Order and judgment affirmed.

Dissenting Opinion by Montgomery, J.:

I fail to find in this record any evidence to prove that the terms of re-employment offered to plaintiff-appellee varied from those of his original employment. His original contract, dated September 1, 1961 provided that he should devote his full time as a member of the defendant-appellant's designing staff for compensation established on a weekly basis. It did not provide that he was to be the chief designer, or contain any other details of his duties or privileges. It was entered into and renewed on this basis. This would require him to abide by the normal operations of the employer's business. The offer of re-employment was on the same basis, although he declined it because of

[ 215 Pa. Super. Page 156]

    the denial of certain privileges which he alleged had been afforded to him. Since his original contract did not give him the right to these privileges, he could not insist upon them in the offer of re-employment.

The verdict in his favor for his total salary during the entire unexpired period of his renewed contract was against the weight of the evidence; and I would grant a new trial for this reason.

Therefore, I respectfully dissent.

19690911

© 1998 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.