Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P was working as an employee of D. P suffered personal injuries which turned out to be so serious that the jury returned a verdict in his favor for $7,500. D accepted the verdict but claims it is barred by two releases P gave D on payment to him of $150 and $600. P testified that he executed the first release after a talk with one, Brown, D's claim agent, who told him that the payment of $150 was only for the tips and wages which he had lost; and that, relying upon this representation, he did not read the release but signed it as Brown told him to do. P made an effort to go back to work but could not. P went back to Brown asking for more money. They could not agree. When P left he said 'Well, I will have to get somebody to get all my tips and everything, my salary, because that is what I am getting.' P went to an attorney named Reich, who, after talking to Brown on the telephone, later brought to P the release drawn on D’s form and told him: 'I was just to sign a receipt for the amount of money that I got for the time I was off, my tips also included, to go back to work and they won't have anything against you * * * he had the word from D that I will be taken care of.' Relaying upon this, and again not reading the release, P signed it and D paid him $600. P claims when he signed the release, he could not read it because of the effects of the accident, and without negligence on his part- he relied on his own lawyer who misinformed him. P claims he understood that the release was to be a receipt for payment of those lost earnings. P got the verdict for the $7,500 and D appealed. The only question raised upon this appeal concerns the validity of two releases, dated August 23, 1943, by which P released all claims against D upon the payment of $600.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.