Smith v. Kirkpatrick
Court of Appeals of New York
111 N.E.2d 209 (1953)
- Written by Denise McGimsey, JD
Facts
H. Gordon Smith (plaintiff) sued William S. Kirkpatrick (defendant) for breach of an employment contract. Kirkpatrick moved for summary judgment on the ground that there was no agreement between the two in compliance with the statute of frauds. The court granted summary judgment to Kirkpatrick but gave Smith leave to amend his complaint in order to bring a claim for the “value of his services.” Smith filed an amended complaint in which he alleged that he and Kirkpatrick had established a partnership or joint venture as to which profits were to be shared equally. After a nonjury trial, the court dismissed the complaint for lacking sufficient evidence to establish Smith’s causes of action. Smith did not appeal. He later brought a second lawsuit against Kirkpatrick in which he sought to recover the reasonable value of services provided under a quantum meruit theory. Kirkpatrick moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground that it was barred by res judicata. The trial court denied Kirkpatrick’s motion. On appeal, the Appellate Division reversed and dismissed Smith’s complaint. Smith appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning ()
What to do next…
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.
