Cited by

1134, 1134 (1904) (concluding that question whether employee was discharged or voluntarily left employment in wrongful discharge action was “a question for the jury”); Horn v. W. Land Ass’n, 22 Minn. 233, 236-37 (1875) (“[A]s to the alleged abandonment of the contract by both parties, or by the defendant with the acquiescence or consent of *351 plaintiff, this was a matter for the jury to determine upon the evidence.”); see also Healy v. Mannheimer, 74 Minn. 240, 240 , 76 N.W.

2 Potter v. Barton, 86 Minn. 288 , ; Bang v. International Sisal Co. 212 Minn. 135 , 4 N. W. (2d) 113 , 141 A. L. R. 657; Horn v. Western Land Assn. 22 Minn. 233 .

2 Fountain v. Oreck’s Inc. 245 Minn. 202 , 71 N. W. (2d) 646 ; Horn v. Western Land Assn. 22 Minn. 233 ; see, Magnuson v. Stevens Brothers, 146 Minn. 38 , ; Costello v. Siems-Carey Co. 140 Minn. 208 , ; O’Donnell v. Daily News Co. 119 Minn. 378 , ; Annotation, 100 A. L. R. 834.

But however variously it may be expressed, the present rule, except in one jurisdiction, is that an employer must show affirmatively, to- reduce damages, that the discharged employee could or did have other earnings subsequent to the wrongful discharge.” Horn v. Western Land Assn. 22 Minn. 233 ; Bennett v. Morton, 46 Minn. 113 , ; McMullan v. Dickinson Co. 60 Minn. 156 , , 27 L. R. A. 409, 51 A. S. R. 511; Beissel v. Vermillion Farmers Elev.

See, Horn v. Western Land Assn. 22 Minn. 233, 237 ; Moe v. Kekos, 127 Minn. 117 , .

Williams v. Anderson, 9 Minn. 39 (50); Horn v. Western Land Assn. 22 Minn. 233 ; Cooper v. Stronge & Warner Co. 111 Minn. 177 , , 27 L.R.A.(N.S.)

*382 Horn v. Western Land Assn. 22 Minn. 233 ; Beissel v. Vermillion Farmers Elev.

Thus in Horn v. Western Land Assn. 22 Minn. 233, 236 , plaintiff had been appointed as attorney for defendant “at a salary of $1,000 per year, payable quarterly,” and was so informed in writing.

Horn v. Western Land Assn. 22 Minn. 233 ; Beissel v. Vermillion Farmers Elev.

But it is contended by plaintiff that, where the client discharges the attorney without cause, he subjects himself to damages for the breach of his contract, and cites Horn v. Western Land Assn. 22 Minn. 233 , and Moyer v. Cantieny, 41 Minn. 242 , , in support of his contention.

It was decided in Horn v. Western Land Association, 22 Minn. 233 , that if in the interim the employee obtained other employment and compensation, inconsistent with his engagement under the contract, such fact constituted affirmative matter in recoupment, which was incumbent upon the defendant to set up and establish.

Mackubin v. Clarkson, 5 Minn. 193 (247); Horn v. Western Land Assn., 22 Minn. 233 .

Horn v. Western Land Ass’n, 22 Minn. 233 ; Howard v. Daly, 61 N. Y. 362, 370, 371 ; Sutherland v. Wyer, 67 Me. 64 .