Logourl black
From our private database of 13,000+ case briefs...

Varney v. Ditmars

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


Facts

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.

Issue

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.

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 129,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,000 briefs, keyed to 177 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.