Akers v. J.B. Sedberry, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Tennessee
286 S.W.2d 617 (1955)
Akers and Whitsitt (plaintiffs) worked for J.B. Sedberry, Inc. (Sedberry) (defendant) under employment contracts. With the company experiencing financial distress, Akers and Whitsitt attended a conference with Mrs. Sedberry and offered their resignations on ninety-day notice, provided they were paid according to their contracts for that period. Mrs. Sedberry did not accept the resignations and continued the conference discussing business for the rest of the day. Less than one week later Mrs. Sedberry sent Akers and Whitsitt telegrams accepting their resignations effective immediately. Akers and Whitsitt sued claiming that their offer to resign was not accepted by Sedberry at the conference and was therefore rejected. The trial court ruled for Akers and Whitsitt and awarded damages. Sedberry appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Felts, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 169,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,800 briefs, keyed to 187 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.