H.B. Campbel v..H. Gruenbaum and Sonn Bros.
A decision has been given in the United States Court for China in: the case of Harry B. Campbell Hevry Gruenbavm and Sonn Bros. Import & Export Ca., Me. In the course of his judgement, Judge C. S. Lobingier states that the defendants entered into the following agreement with plaintiff "We hereby engage you to act as manager of our Shanghai office in conjunction with Mr. James Mac-Donell, effective April 1, 1922, at a salary of Tls. 1.059 per month and bonus as carried by separate agreement. Should either party desire to terminate this agreement, 60 days' notice shall be accepted."' The plaintiff assumed his duties on the date named in the contract and served for one month, after which, apparently by mutual agreement, the arrangement was terminated, plaintiff received his fuili salary for the month during which he served and for two months. covering the period of notice, and thereupon signed a receipt "in full settlement of the above account."
He continued for a time to work on a commission basis for defendant's Shanghai office, but the latter meanwhile went into liquidation and on June 2 plaintiff brought this action, claiming damages in the sun of Tls. 25,000, based upon certain alleeed representations which he claims were false and fraudulent and which induced him to leave his former position to accept this. The rule is that when a contract ig once entered into "all previous negotiations and agreements* with reference to the subject matter are presumed to have been merged in the written contract and the whole engagement of the parties and the extent of their undertaking is presumed to have been reduced to writing." Plaintiff seeks to escape its force by urging that he sues not on the contract, but independently thereof, but if this theory were accepted it would seem possible to nullify the rule in almost any
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.