OCR Text |
Show COURT RULES ON LI AND DRINK Single Spree Not Enough to Break Contract of Worker and Employe - - ' NEW YORK. Dec. 24. A single act of drunkenness is not suffl ient under the laws of New York slate to Justify Justi-fy the dischHrxe of an employe who is under contract, two ueticcs of the su-j su-j preme court held in a decision Friday. I A third justice dissented and declared IS single act of drunkenness during ! business hours Is "inexcusable." The decision was given at an appelate appel-ate term of supreme court, in n suit brought by Frederick Y. Herbert, a iral estate agc-nt. against his employ ' j ers v.ho had discharged him because' he was found drunk The rase pre I viously was tried in city court and dis-( 'missed. Herbert appealed Th. dci jsion Friday directed a new trial upon i which the court held the question ! should be leit to a jury, j Justice Mullan. in the majority j decision, held that the "courts are j not warranted in attempting to create and enforee a higher standard than j that set by the averuge nf mankind in the community.' "The day may come," he added. wiu n intoxication will b u i i jjg cause foi disgrace hai d single in- j I stand of it will ! Miftici.-m n Justi H , ! the discharge Of a servant by his M masl ' i becaust ol It, a mattt i ol fit : law. regardless ol the nature of th H services or the effert of the Insobriet; BE upon the master's business." The court declared, nowever, thai h that day is not yet here. |