Case Name: Marvin PATTASHNICK, Appellant, v. RETIRED PERSONS PHARMACY, INC., a corporation, Appellee
Court: District of Columbia Municipal Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: District of Columbia
Decision Date: 1962-04-19
Citations: 179 A.2d 906
Docket Number: No. 2933
Parties: Marvin PATTASHNICK, Appellant, v. RETIRED PERSONS PHARMACY, INC., a corporation, Appellee.
Judges: Before HOOD, Chief Judge, QUINN, Associate Judge, and MYERS, Associate Judge of The Municipal Court for the District of Columbia, sitting by designation.
Reporter: West's Atlantic Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 179
Pages: 906–907

Head Matter:
Marvin PATTASHNICK, Appellant, v. RETIRED PERSONS PHARMACY, INC., a corporation, Appellee.
No. 2933.
Municipal Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
Argued April 2, 1962.
Decided April 19, 1962.
Marvin Pattashnick, pro se. H. Eugene Bryan, Washington, D. C., also entered an appearance for appellant.
Lawrence J. Latto and William H. Dempsey, Jr., Washingon, D. C., for appellee.
Before HOOD, Chief Judge, QUINN, Associate Judge, and MYERS, Associate Judge of The Municipal Court for the District of Columbia, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
This case involved a dispute over an alleged oral agreement relating to severance pay. At trial, the testimony concerning the agreement was in fiat conflict. Appellant, a registered pharmacist, contended that when his services were terminated by appellee, he should have received six weeks' severance pay under the terms of an existing oral agreement. Appellee maintained that since the oral agreement contained a condition precedent which had not been fulfilled, appellant was entitled only to one week's pay, which was tendered at trial and accepted by appellant. The court entered a finding for appellee and this appeal followed.
Although represented by counsel in the trial court, appellant appeared before this court in proper person. For this reason, we have carefully reviewed the record. We find no error.
Affirmed.