Varney v. Ditmars
Court of Appeals of New York
111 N.E. 822 (1916)
Architect Ditmars (defendant) employed draftsman Varney (plaintiff) at $35 weekly; in February 1911, Ditmars offered Varney and another designer an extra $5 weekly plus, if they continued working and completed certain long-pending projects, a "fair share" of profits to be determined when Ditmars closed his books on January 1, 1912. Varney continued working and was paid $40 weekly, but after refusing to work on Election Day, November 7, 1911 (during which he then became too ill to work until December), Ditmars fired him by letter for the absence and disobedience. After recovering, Varney sought to resume work under the February agreement, but Ditmars denied any such agreement existed; Varney sued to enforce the "fair share" profit-sharing promise, and the trial court dismissed the case.
Whether, for a contract to be valid, the agreement made must be definite and explicit enough to permit the full intent of the parties to be ascertained with a reasonable degree of certainty.