Murphy v. De Haan
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Polh District Court. — Hon.' O. P. Holmes, Judge. Action for the agreed price of work and labor performed at defendant’s instance and request Defendant denies the alleged contract, admits certain payments referred to-by plaintiff, and says that plaintiff has been paid in full for all labor performed. The case was tried to- a jury, resulting in a verdict and judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. —
1Opinion of the Court
Deemer, J. —
Plaintiff claims in his petition that on August 20, 1898, defendant, by oral contract, employed him (plaintiff) as a general salesman, for the term, of one year, at the agreed compensation of $60 per month; that he immediately entered into defendant’s service and continued therein for the term of Í0 months and 11 days; that defendant has paid him the sum of $391; and that there yet remains due the sum of $233. Defendant’s answer, as we have seen, was a general denial, and a plea of payment.
1 It is contended that, while the petition states a valid cause of action, plaintiff proved…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Tinkler v. SwaynieIndiana Supreme Court · 1880
- Sims v. McEwen's Adm'rSupreme Court of Alabama · 1855
- Swanzey v. MooreIllinois Supreme Court · 1859
- Fuller v. RiceMichigan Supreme Court · 1884
- La Du-King Manufacturing Co. v. La DuSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Diamond v. JacquithArizona Supreme Court · 1912
- Pollmann v. Belle Plaine Livestock Auction, Inc.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1997
- Glass v. Minnesota Protective Life Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1982
- Oxborough v. St. MartinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
- Farrow v. BurnsAlabama Court of Appeals · 1921
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.