Jackman v. Military Publications, Inc.

Decision Date28 September 1964
Docket NumberCiv. A. No. 29465.
Citation234 F. Supp. 217
PartiesA. W. JACKMAN, Jr., Ormond Beach, Florida, v. MILITARY PUBLICATIONS, INC., Jenkintown, Pennsylvania.
CourtU.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania

John F. Naulty, Philadelphia, Pa., for plaintiff.

Joseph L. McGlynn, Jr., Blank, Rudenko, Klaus & Rome, Philadelphia, Pa., for defendant.

GRIM, District Judge.

This is an action to recover certain alleged unpaid compensation under an employment contract between plaintiff and the defendant company. After a non-jury trial before this court, judgment was entered against the plaintiff and in favor of the defendant company based upon findings of fact and conclusions of law made by the court at the end of the trial. Plaintiff subsequently filed a motion for new trial which is now before the court for disposition.

The contract between the parties provided that plaintiff would act as "representative" for the defendant in the sale of yearbooks to personnel of the military services located at Fort Knox, Kentucky and Fort Dix, New Jersey. The contract further provided that plaintiff would receive as compensation for his services "a flat salary of $10,000 * * * per year * * *" plus a commission of five percent on gross sales of books and publications at Fort Dix, New Jersey, and on sales at Fort Knox, a commission of five percent on gross sales in excess of 3,000 copies. The contract contained no clause indicating how long the employment relationship was to exist.

From 1957 to 1959, plaintiff acted as agent for the defendant. During this period, plaintiff obtained from the authorities at Fort Knox and Fort Dix written permission for himself and other agents of defendant to contact the personnel stationed at these posts and to attempt to sell yearbooks to them. A great number of yearbooks were sold during this period and plaintiff has been fully compensated under the contract with defendant for his services during the period in which defendant concedes that plaintiff worked for it.

On May 15, 1959, defendant sent a written termination notice to plaintiff purporting to terminate the employment contract on that day. The issue in the case is whether or not defendant had the legal right under the terms of the employment contract to terminate it at will.

The contract was executed in Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania law therefore controls. In Pennsylvania "the general rule is that when a contract provides that one party shall render services to another, or shall act as an agent, or shall have exclusive sales rights within certain territory, but does not specify a definite time or prescribe conditions which shall determine the duration of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Bonham v. Dresser Industries, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    • 28 Diciembre 1976
    ...may be terminated at will by either party. In support, Dresser relies upon the principles set forth in Jackman v. Military Publications, Inc., 234 F.Supp. 217, 218 (E.D.Pa.1964), aff'd 350 F.2d 383, 385 (3d Cir. 1965), and McKinney v. Armco Steel Corporation, 270 F.Supp. 360, 362 In Jackman......
  • North Am. Pump Corp. v. Clay Equipment Corp.
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • 27 Julio 1972
    ...same conclusion. C. C. Hauff Hardware, Inc. v. Long Manufacturing Co., 257 Iowa 1127, 136 N.W.2d 276 (1965); Jackman v. Military Publications, Inc., 234 F.Supp. 217 (E.D.Pa.1964); Mayflower Air-Conditioners, Inc. v. West Coast Heating Supply, Inc., 54 Wash.2d 211, 339 P.2d 89 (1959); Stutzm......
  • BW Acceptance Corporation v. Torgerson
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Montana
    • 13 Octubre 1964
    ... ... Fieldcrest Dairies, Inc., 316 U.S. 168, 62 S.Ct. 986, 86 L.Ed. 1355, or involved the scope of a ... ...
  • Geib v. Alan Wood Steel Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    • 17 Septiembre 1976
    ...by showing facts or circumstances establishing tenure. Mayerson v. Washington Manufacturing Co., supra; Jackman v. Military Publications, Inc., 234 F.Supp. 217 (E.D.Pa.1964), aff'd, 350 F.2d 383 (3d Cir. 1965); Lubrecht v. Laurel Stripping Co., 387 Pa. 393, 127 A.2d 687 (1957). Tenure can b......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT