Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 7.djvu/658

 6e6 FSDEBAL BEPOBTEB. �cause, as these manifestations are natural and not unfre- quent in a business where there are many whims and caprices, much diversity of taste and opinion, and so many petty causes for annoyance and irritation. �As the plaintiff, in performing her contract, had to deal principally with lady customers of various tastes and temper- aments, I think that such dealings ought to be received with reasonable forbearance and allowance, and ought not to be judged by the rigid rules that are properly applicable to the actions of men in the calm and ordinary business transac- tions of life. The well-known usages and experiences of Soci- ety in such matters ought to be recognized, and in some degree allowed and respected, unless they produce serions injury to business interests. �The mere failure of the business experiment which the defendants had just undertaken, and from which they had not realized anticipated profits, did not justify them in dis- charging the plaintiff unless her want of competency, skill, and general fitness for the position she occupied contributed materially to such failure. �On the subject which we are considering no specifie gen- erai rule can be framed applicable to all cases which may arise. Each case must in some degree be governed by its own peculiar circumstances. The nearest approximation to a general rule is : where an employe violates or fails to com- ply with any express or implied condition of the contract, which results in material injury to the business of the em- ployer, or amounts to insubordination or disregard of his feelings and proper authority, the contract may be determined before the expiration of the term of service. �I have already stated that if the special contract was made as alleged, and the defendants without sufficient cause discharged the plaintiff from their service before the expira- tion of the term of employment, the prima facie measure of damages is the amount which she would have received had the contract been fulfilled. As she did not actually perform the services stipulated in the contract, the defendants may show in mitigation of damages that during the balance of ��� �