May v. CHARLES C. HAYNES, JR., CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

The only question is whether the court erred in overruling Haynes’ motion for judgment of nonsuit in respect of the $800.00 allegedly due under the contract of May 18, 1956.

There is no controversy as to these facts: A contract was entered into under which plaintiffs were to paint two houses on property known as Fargo 1 and 2, Rosebriar Subdivision, for $800.00. Plaintiffs completed this work on or about May 30,1956, but have not been paid.

The evidence tends to show the contract was entered into at the Haynes home in Hope Valley, the persons present being (plaintiff) Mike D. May, Haynes and…