SmartBrief
Confirm favorite deletion?
Conflict of Laws Keyed to Brilmayer
Holzer v. Deutsche Reichsbahn-Gesellschaft
Citation:
277 N.Y. 474, 14 N.E.2d 798 (1938)Facts
Plaintiff, Holzer, was a Jewish German national. He was contracted by the Defendants, Schenker & Co. G.m.b.H. (Schenker) and Deutsche Reichsbahn-Gesellschaft (DRG), both German corporations, to perform services for a period of three years beginning on January 1, 1932 in Germany and in other locations outside of the state of New York. The contract provided that in the event Holzer died or became unable “without fault on his part” to serve during the contract period, the Defendant corporations would pay him or his heirs 120,000 marks “in discharge of their obligations under the hiring.” In June 1933, the Defendant corporations terminated Holzer from his employment, effective October 31, 1933.
Holzer sued the Defendant corporations in New York state court claiming damages for two separate causes of action for breach of contract. The first cause of action alleged that on June 21, 1933, the Defendant corporations discharged Holzer upon the sole ground that he was Jewish. The lower court found in favor of Holzer, and he was awarded $50,000.00 in damages. The second cause of action alleged that in April 1933, Plaintiff was unable, without any fault of his own, to continue his services because he was incarcerated in a prison and in a concentration camp for six months by the German government. The reason for his imprisonment was a new German policy, which required the elimination of all “persons of Jewish blood from leading commercial, industrial, and transportation enterprises.” The lower court found in favor of Holzer, and he was awarded $50,000.00 in damages.
DRG, in a separate defense, alleged that Holzer’s contract was made and to be performed in Germany, was terminated in Germany, and should be governed by the laws of Germany. Subsequent to April 7, 1933, the German government adopted certain laws, decrees, and orders which required persons of non-Aryan descent to be retired. Holzer was of non-Aryan decent, and in compliance with the new German laws, his employment contract was terminated.
The New York Special Term court granted Plaintiff’s motion to strike DRG’s separate defense, and the Appellate Division affirmed but certified two questions to the New York Court of Appeals. First, is DRG’s separate defense sufficient in law on its face? Second, does the complaint state facts sufficient to continue a cause of action?
Only StudyBuddy Pro offers the complete Case Brief Anatomy*
Access the most important case brief elements for optimal case understanding.
*Case Brief Anatomy includes: Brief Prologue, Complete Case Brief, Brief Epilogue
- The Brief Prologue provides necessary case brief introductory information and includes:
Topic:
Identifies the topic of law and where this case fits within your course outline.Parties:
Identifies the cast of characters involved in the case.Procedural Posture & History:
Shares the case history with how lower courts have ruled on the matter.Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.:
A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.Case Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises:
Identifies and Defines Legal Authority used in this case.
- The Case Brief is the complete case summarized and authored in the traditional Law School I.R.A.C. format. The Pro case brief includes:
Brief Facts:
A Synopsis of the Facts of the case.Rule of Law:
Identifies the Legal Principle the Court used in deciding the case.Facts:
What are the factual circumstances that gave rise to the civil or criminal case? What is the relationship of the Parties that are involved in the case.Issue(s):
Lists the Questions of Law that are raised by the Facts of the case.Holding:
Shares the Court's answer to the legal questions raised in the issue.Concurring / Dissenting Opinions:
Includes valuable concurring or dissenting opinions and their key points.Reasoning and Analysis:
Identifies the chain of argument(s) which led the judges to rule as they did.
- The Brief Prologue closes the case brief with important forward-looking discussion and includes:
Policy:
Identifies the Policy if any that has been established by the case.Court Direction:
Shares where the Court went from here for this case.
Topic Resources
Topic Outline
Choice of Law