Matarese v. Moore-McCormack Lines, Inc,

158 F.2d 631 (1946)

Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
M
From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Matarese v. Moore-McCormack Lines, Inc,

United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
158 F.2d 631 (1946)

  • Written by Jack Newell, JD

Facts

Lawrence Matarese (plaintiff) was a dockworker employed by Moore-McCormack Lines, Incorporated (MML) (defendant). Matarese had invented a machine that was able to unload cargo from boats more efficiently. Furey, an employee of MML, made an oral offer to Matarese to go into business with him regarding the machine. Furey visited Matarese, who gave him a demonstration of how the machine worked. Furey promised to offer Matarese one-third of the profit if the machine could be put into use at the docks. Matarese later claimed Furey represented himself as MML’s agent, but Furey denied this. Matarese agreed to Furey’s offer. Many of the machines were built, and they were used on the docks. Matarese asked Furey about the compensation for the use of his ideas on several occasions. Furey promised Matarese the money but never followed through. Matarese was later terminated from his job. Matarese sued in federal district court for breach of contract, but MML countered that Furey was not acting as an agent, so it was not bound. Matarese amended his complaint to sue on a theory of unjust enrichment or quantum meruit, because MML had profited from his ideas without compensating him. The district court ruled in Matarese’s favor, granting him damages. MML appealed to the Second Circuit.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Clark, J.)

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 810,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead 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.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

Intellectual Property

Key Terms