Legal Opinion

Feister v. Kent

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided October 9, 1894PublishedCited by 13 opinions

Appeal from Iowa District Court. — Hon. S. H. Fairall, Judge. Action for work, labor, and board. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtKinne, J.

*41 *2I. Plaintiff entered into defendant’s employment as a clerk in his store on March 8, 1888, and so continued until September 6, 1889. Plaintiff claims that by a verbal agreement between him and defendant the latter was to compensate him for his services as follows: For the first month, his board, and after that time what his services were reasonably worth; that his services were reasonably worth thirty dollars per month from April 8 to May 15,1888; and that from the latter date until September 6, 1889, he had the care and management of defendant’s store under the casual supervision of the…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Pelamourges v. ClarkSupreme Court of Iowa · 1859
  2. Edwards & Beardsley v. Cottrell & BabcockSupreme Court of Iowa · 1876
  3. Murray v. WeberSupreme Court of Iowa · 1894
  4. Wood v. WhittonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1885
  5. Shroeder v. WebsterSupreme Court of Iowa · 1893

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Henderson v. EdwardsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1921
  2. Guth v. BellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1911
  3. Hampton v. BurrellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1945
  4. Herkimer v. KeelerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1899
  5. Huss v. Chicago Great Western Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1901

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API