Caffrey v. Omilak Gold & Silver Min. Co.

Citations

• 4 Cal. Unrep. 601
• 36 P. 388

Syllabus

<p>Action for Services—Evidence.—In an Action for services rendered by plaintiff’s assignor, the complaint alleged that they were rendered at the special request of defendant. Defendant, in its answer, admitted that the services were rendered, and set out a copy of the agreement between such assignor and its manager. Held, that it was not error to admit such agreement in evidence against an objection by the defendant.</p> <p>Action for Services.—In Setting Forth the Agreement, Defendant alleged that it was made by G. “as” manager of defendant corporation. The agreement purported to have been made on defendant’s behalf, and G. testified that he made it on behalf of defendant. Held, that an objection by defendant that it was on its face not its agreement, but the agreement of G., its manager, was not tenable.</p>