Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

GEHIN-SCOTT v. NEWSON

March 9, 1994

GILBERT A. GEHIN-SCOTT, Plaintiff,
v.
NEWSON, INC., formerly known as W.H. NEWBOLD'S SON & CO., INC. and FAHNESTOCK & CO., INC., Defendants.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: RONALD L. BUCKWALTER

 BUCKWALTER, J.

 I held a non-jury trial on February 16, 1994 and find as follows.

 I. FACTS

 Plaintiff (hereafter Gehin-Scott) was born March 29, 1930. Between May of 1971 and April 16, 1990, he was employed by defendant W.H. Newbold's Son & Co., Inc. which through Articles of Amendment changed its name to Newson, Inc. (see prior memorandum of this court dated January 4, 1994 in which summary judgment was granted in favor of Fahnestock & Co., Inc., the other named defendant). Because the parties refer to the defendant as Newbold, I will do the same in this memorandum.

 Gehin-Scott was a commission trader specializing in private placement of corporate debt instruments.

 Newbold was originally formed as a partnership. During these partnership years, Gehin-Scott was a managing director, a title he retained after Newbold's incorporation. He never had a written contract with defendant. He was an at will employee of Newbold.

 Gehin-Scott had a very satisfactory arrangement for most of the 19 years he worked for Newbold. His dissatisfaction was coincidental with the acquisition of Newbold by Hopper Soliday ("Hopper") on or about January 6, 1989.

 Hopper instituted a variety of policies which it anticipated would centralize and standardize the business practices and policies of Newbold. Some policies included:

 1) Requiring specific treasurer approval before making a trade in excess of one million dollars.

 2) Prohibiting the settling of transactions on Fridays or at month's end.

 3) Requiring the repeated telephoning of buyers to prompt them to transfer funds so that the capital could be raised in order to pay sellers.

 4) Limiting formerly unlimited expense accounts.

 5) Eliminating monthly draws for all commissioned employees.

 6) Changing and standardizing the method of ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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