This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Issue: Whether a provision in the K, making written notice of a claim a condition precedent to recovery, is contrary to public policy.
Rule: A fulfillment of a 30 day notice requirement is expressly made a condition precedent to any recovery.
Facts: Pl, Inman worked for Df Clyde as a derrickman under a written contract of employment, signed by both parties in late 1959. Early 1960 Inman was fired by Clyde. A portion of the contract stated notice of any claim against Clyde was required w/i 30 days and no longer than 1 yr. Pl·s only notice was the complaint under this action for wrongful termination. Trial Court: Motion for summary judgment was granted and judgment entered in favor of the company. PL Argument: Claimed the company fired him without justification, that this was breach of a K, and that he was entitled to certain damages for the breach. He thought he substantially complied with the contractual requirement, and this is a condition precedent. When the company discharged him, he was excused from any further performance. DF Argument: Moved for summary judgment on the ground that Inman·s failure to give written notice of his claim, as required by the K, was a bar to his action based on the K. Holding: Affirmed