James Radcliffe Sons Co. v. Hawthorne
New Jersey Court of Chancery
1Opinion of the Court
Watts was the engineer employed by Bang, the contractor. He claimed that Bang promised to pay him $1,000 a month; Bang testified the agreed salary was $100 a week. If the former was the fact, Watts' claim was valid. If the latter was true, he had been paid in full and his claim was properly rejected. The master found that Watts was employed at $100 a week; the evidence, though conflicting, supports the finding and therefore the finding will be sustained. "A master's finding of a fact in issue is entitled to great weight and should not be disturbed when there is a serious conflict of…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Gibbs v. HanchetteMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
- Nicolai v. Van FridaghOregon Supreme Court · 1892
- Riverside Apartment Corp. v. Capitol Const. Co.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1930
- Camden Iron Works v. City of CamdenSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1902
- Garrison v. BorioNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1901
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Integrity Trust Co. v. Club Atlantic, Inc.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1932