Matthews v. Minnesota Tribune Co.
| Decision Date | 11 June 1943 |
| Docket Number | No. 33451.,No. 33450.,33450.,33451. |
| Parties | MATTHEWS et al. v. MINNESOTA TRIBUNE CO. |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Appeal from District Court, Hennepin County; Luther W. Youngdahl, Judge.
Suits by John Matthews and by Bernard T. Campbell against the Minnesota Tribune Company for severance pay pursuant to a contract. The court directed a verdict for plaintiff Matthews and from an order denying defendant's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a new trial, the defendant appeals. The court made findings of fact and conclusions of law for plaintiff Campbell, and from an order denying defendant's motion for amended findings of fact and conclusions of law or for a new trial, defendant appeals. The cases were consolidated for the appeal.
Affirmed.
Faegre & Benson, Raymond A. Scallen, and Donald L. Robertson, all of Minneapolis, for appellant.
Leonard, Street & Deinard and Hyman Edelman, all of Minneapolis, for respondents.
Two suits by defendant's employes for severance pay pursuant to a labor contract between defendant, a newspaper publisher, and the Twin Cities Newspaper Guild on behalf of the employes. The cases are consolidated for this appeal. The pertinent part of the contract is as follows:
The facts are not in dispute. It is plaintiffs' contention that they were "dismissed" within the meaning of this contract, and defendant's contention that they were not. The court directed a verdict for plaintiff in the Matthews case, and the appeal is from an order denying defendant's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a new trial. By stipulation, the bulk of the evidence in the Matthews case was incorporated in the Campbell case, which was tried to the court, which made findings of fact and conclusions of law for plaintiff. The appeal is from an order denying defendant's motion for amended findings of fact, conclusions of law, or a new trial.
The Minnesota Tribune Company, hereinafter referred to as the Tribune company, prior to April 30, 1941, was principally engaged in publishing newspapers in the city of Minneapolis, namely the Minneapolis Morning Tribune, the Minneapolis Times-Tribune, and the Minneapolis Sunday Tribune. On that date it entered into a contract, which is a part of this record, labeled "Contract of Sale," with the Minneapolis Star-Journal Company, which was also in the same line of business in Minneapolis as publisher of the Star-Journal. By this contract the Tribune company, which throughout the contract is referred to as the "Seller," transferred all of its newspaper assets to the Star-Journal company, which is therein referred to as the "Buyer." The Tribune company received in exchange one-third of the stock in the Star-Journal company, which thereafter was to be known as the Minneapolis Star-Journal and Tribune Company.
Beginning May 1, 1941, the actual printing of the Minneapolis Morning Tribune was transferred to the Star-Journal building, the Minneapolis Times-Tribune was discontinued, and in its stead the Minneapolis Daily Times was published at the Tribune building. The narrow question presented is whether or not the defendant Tribune company then ceased to be the employer of the plaintiffs.
Matthews Case.
Matthews was an artist and layout man for the Tribune newspapers and had been in the defendant's employ for about 20 years. He first learned of the proposed sale or transfer of the newspapers on April 30, 1941, when a public announcement was made. He continued to work at the Tribune building on the Times for about a week from that date, when his immediate superior told him to see the managing editor of the Star-Journal about a job on the Morning Tribune at the Star-Journal building. He did, and, upon being told that there was no longer a place for him at the Tribune, went to work for the Star-Journal. His salary was somewhat less than he had received from the Tribune company, but he lost no time from work.
Campbell Case.
Campbell had been in defendant's employ since 1925 and in 1941 was city editor of the Times-Tribune. On April 30, 1941, he was told by his immediate superior that "the Star has bought this paper." Campbell continued to work in the Tribune building on the Minneapolis Daily Times, doing the same work at the same pay, and in fact in the same office, that he did on the Times-Tribune.
Both men continued to receive their pay for several weeks after April 30, 1941, on checks of the Minnesota Tribune Company, which company, the record shows, was reimbursed for these amounts by the new Minneapolis Star-Journal and Tribune Company. Thereafter they were paid by the Minneapolis Star-Journal and Tribune Company.
1. The principal question is whether or not defendant's sale of its newspaper assets and its retirement from the publishing field constituted a dismissal of plaintiffs within the meaning of the contract. It is defendant's position that the sale or transfer of its newspaper assets to the newly formed Star-Journal and Tribune company in exchange for approximately one-third of the stock in that company did not constitute a termination of plaintiffs' employment.
It is not denied that after May 1, 1941, the defendant corporation was no longer engaged in the newspaper publishing business in Minneapolis. Its president so testified. However, the...
To continue reading
Request your trial