Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Holzer v. Deutsche Reichsbahn-Gesellschaft et al.

Court of Appeals of New York
14 N.E.2d 798 (1938)


Facts

Holzer (plaintiff), a Jewish German national, entered into a three-year employment contract beginning January 1, 1932 with Schenker & Co. (Schenker), a German transportation company. Schenker was controlled by Deutsche Reichsbahn-Gesellschaft (DRG) and other German corporations (defendants). Holzer’s work was to take place in Germany and in other locations outside of New York. The contract provided that defendants would pay Holzer or his heirs a certain sum in the event of Holzer’s death or his incapacity to work, if at no fault of his own. In April 1933, Holzer was placed in a concentration camp by the German government for approximately six months. At or around the same time, the German government enacted various laws requiring non-Aryan persons to be terminated from their employment. In June 1933, defendants terminated Holzer from his employment as of October 31, 1933. Holzer sued defendants in a New York court, claiming damages of approximately $50,000 for the period following his termination and $50,000 for the period of his incarceration. As a defense, DRG claimed that it was required to terminate Holzer under German law and that German law controlled because the contract was entirely made and performed there. Holzer moved to dismiss that defense. The Special Term of the Supreme Court granted Holzer’s motion. The Appellate Division affirmed and certified two questions to the Court of Appeals: (1) was DRG’s defense sufficient on its face as a matter of law, and (2) did the complaint state sufficient facts to establish a cause of action?

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Per Curiam)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. 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.

  2. 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 176,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 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.