Logourl black

Varney v. Ditmars

Court of Appeals of New York
111 N.E. 822 (1916)


In October 1910, Ditmars (defendant), an architect, hired Varney (plaintiff), an architect and draftsmen, at a rate of $35.00 per week. On February 1, 1911, Varney and another designer talked with Ditmars about their employment. Ditmars agreed to pay Varney and the designer an extra $5.00 per week if they would continue working for him and would complete certain projects that had been sitting in his office for three years. If Varney and the designer continued working this way, Ditmars said that on January 1, 1912, he would close his books and give them a “fair share” of his profits. Varney continued working in a favorable manner to Ditmars, and was paid $40 per week. On November 6, 1911, Ditmars told Varney he wished him to come into work the following day, Election Day. Varney replied that he did not wish to work that day, but to stay home and attend a local election. Varney did not come into the office on November 7, 1911. On that day, Varney became ill, and remained ill and unable to work until around December 1, 1911. On November 11, 1911, Ditmars sent a letter to Varney saying he was upset that Varney did not come to work as requested on Election Day, and that because of his absence and disobedience, he was being discharged from employment with Ditmars. After Varney recovered, he went back to Ditmars’ office and requested to begin work again according to the agreement made with Ditmars on February 1, 2011. Ditmars said that there was no agreement, and refused to allow Varney to continue working for him. Varney brought suit against Ditmar in New York state court seeking to enforce the alleged February 1, 2011 agreement where Ditmar agreed to pay Varney a “fair share” of his profits. The trial court dismissed the case, and Varney appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.


The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Holding and Reasoning (Chase, J.)

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, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Dissent (Cardozo, J.)

The dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the dissenting judge or justice’s opinion. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Here's why 91,000 law students rely 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.
  • 12,498 briefs - keyed to 168 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.
  • Ability to tag case briefs in an outlining tool.
  • Top-notch customer support.
Start Your Free Trial Now