Friermuth v. Friermuth
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, of the Third Judicial District, County of Santa Cruz. The plaintiff was the son of the defendant.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court, of the Third Judicial District, County of Santa Cruz. The plaintiff was the son of the defendant. The complaint contained three counts, one for services performed by the plaintiff for his father and Steigleman, who were partners during the minority of the plaintiff, from the 18th day of June, 1867, to the 18th day of June, 1869, and another for like services, from the 18th day of June, 1869, when the plaintiff is alleged to have attained his majority, to the 1st of May, 1871. These two counts averred special promises to pay the plaintiff twenty-five dollars per…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court:
The demurrer to the complaint was properly overruled. The action was brought against the defendant as surviving partner of the firm of Friermuth & Steigleman, to recover for work and labor performed by the plaintiff, and the complaint is sufficient both in substance and form.
Upon the question of the value of the plaintiff’s services the testimony was conflicting. Aside from the evidence in reference to a special contract, there was testimony tending to prove that the services were worth seventy-five dollars per month. In such case we cannot interfere with the finding of the Court…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Andrus v. FosterSupreme Court of Vermont · 1845
- Dye v. KerrNew York Supreme Court · 1851
3Cited by16 opinions
- Mayborne v. Citizens Trust & Savings BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
- Gjurich v. FiegCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
- Hartley v. BohrerIdaho Supreme Court · 1932
- Tumlin v. Bass Furnace Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1894
- Crane v. DerrickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.