Nicholson v. Patchin
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Superior Court of the City of San Francisco. Assumpsit for services rendered as a clerk for the defendant. The case was referred to Edward Stanly, to report a judgment, who found the facts as stated in the opinion of the Court, and gave judgment for the plaintiff, who sued on. a quantum meruit. The Court refused to set aside the report of the Referee, and defendant appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtMurray, C. J.
Heydenfeldt, J., concurred,
The report of the Referee shows that the defendant employed the plaintiff for one month, for one hundred dollars; that the plaintiff after-wards remained in his service; and that no new contract was made as to the rate of compensation.
The Referee has proceeded on the ground that the plaintiff is entitled to recover upon a quantum meruit. The rule of law applicable in such cases is, that where the person hired continues in employment without any new contract, the fair presumption is, that both parties understood that the same salary is to be paid. See the N. H. Iron…
2Cited by4 opinions
- McCullough Iron Co. v. CarpenterCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1887
- Standard Oil Co. v. Gilbert & Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1890
- Otten v. San Francisco Hotel Owners Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
- Brandenburg v. SF & G. CO., INC.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1955