TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Di Prosa v. Post Corp.

Frank Di Prosa, Appellant-Respondent v. Post Corporation

Di Prosa v. Post Corp., 99 A.D.2d 653 (1984)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · State Appellate Courts
Decided
January 27, 1984
Citations
99 A.D.2d 653472 N.Y.S.2d 651984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16904

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Judgment unanimously affirmed, without costs, and motion to amend record to include cross appeal granted. Memorandum: We affirm the order setting aside the verdict on the second cause of action for reasons stated at Trial Term. With respect to the first cause of action pertaining to the claim for severance pay, defendants have failed to preserve for appellate review the issue of lack of consideration for the promise to pay. The sole factual issue submitted to the jury in the court’s charge and in the special questions was whether defendants made an outright promise to pay plaintiff’s salary for 26 weeks or whether they said that the payments would stop if plaintiff got another job within that period. There was no exception to the charge, and the record shows that defendants made no objection during the trial or on the posttrial motions to the legal theory on which the case was submitted. (Appeals from judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Smith, J. — employment contract.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Doerr, Green, O’Donnell and Moule, JJ.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1994: 119942026peak 1994 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Sullivan v. LTV Aerospace and Defense Co.850 F. Supp. 202 (W.D.N.Y. 1994)

Most recent

  1. Sullivan v. LTV Aerospace and Defense Co.850 F. Supp. 202 (W.D.N.Y. 1994)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list