Varney v. Ditmars

• Ditmars = boss of an architectural firm
• Varney = an employee
• In October 1910, Ditmars hired Varney with an initial salary of $35/week
• Shortly afterward, Varney wanted to accept a position with a different company; however, Ditmars persuaded Varney to stay put
• In early 1911, Ditmars raised Varney's salary to $40/week
• Additionally, Varney put in extra work in exchange for a promise of extra pay from Ditmars
• Disregarding the objections of Ditmars, Varney stayed home on the election day in his village on November 6th 1911
• Varney called in sick the few days following November 6th 1911
• Ditmars fired Varney on November 11th 1911
• Before the end of the year 1911, Ditmars paid the fired Varney $50 for a special work

• Varney sued Ditmars claiming that he was owed $1,680
• At trial, Varney (the employee) was the only witness to testify about the profit-sharing verbal contract
• Varney lost
• Varney lost in the Appellate Division in New York state

An executory employment contract based on vague & in-definite terms in un-enforceable.

• Contracts_Ayres/9th_ed._Outline#E._Termination_of_Offer
• Benjamin Cardozo dissented that the promise to pay a fair share of the profits is too vague. In Cardozo's opinion, it was clear enough. Moreover, he thought that Varney had been improperly fired.