Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 7.djvu/654

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.

642 FBOKBAIi fiKPOBTBB. �3. Same— Saxte— Same. �' Buch discfaarge is also justUIable where the disposition and deport- ment of the servai^t is such as to SQriously injure the custom and busi- ness of the master. 4. 'Bamk— Same— 8AME. �' ' But sligbt discourtesies, hastj words, and occasional exhibitions of irritation, or even ill temper, are not aufflcient cause for a discharge ■where there are many petty causes for annoyance and irritation in sucb business. 5. Bajik — DiscHAKGS— Damages, ' �If the master, without sufflcient cause, diseharges the servant be- fore the expiration of the tena, the prima fade measure of damages is the amount which she would have received had the contract of service been fulfilled. '6. Bame-^Same— Samb. ' . ' �The master,- however, may shcfw in mitigation of damages that during the balance of the unexpired term she received other similar employment, or might have received such employment by proper efforts. �7. Samb— Samb— Bame. �8he isrequired in such case, however, bnly to have used reasonable diligence in obtaining employment in business of the same kind, or similar to that mentioned in the contract. �8. Samb— Breach of Contbaot— Cobtdonation. �If there bas been an actual t'orgiveness of a breach of contract on the part 6f a master to a defaulting servant, he callnot afterwards rely upon such breach in discharging the servant ; but such condoiia- tion can in no respect extend to subsequent ofiences, or to a continued deficiency. �9. Same — Same — Samb. �Such breach is prima fade condoned by the continued retention of the servant, but the question is one of fact, to be determined by a jury.— [Ed. �Action to recover damages for the breach of a special con- tract. �Ruffin, Pannill de King, for plaintiff. �Montgomery e Staples, for defendants. �DicK, D. J., (charging jury.) From the large number of ladies and gentlemen who have been in attendance on the court during the progress Of ttiis trial, it is evident that this case has excited considerable public interest. The trial bas consumed much time, but, net more than was necessary to develop the merits of the eas^. The testimony, in many partieulars, is varions and oontradictory, but the oounael in ��� �