Dibble v. DeMattos

Citations

• 8 Wash. 542
• 36 P. 485
• 1894 Wash. LEXIS 106

Syllabus

<p>ACTION FOR MONEY HAD AND RECEIVED — SUFFICIENCY OP EVIDENCE— STATUTE OF FRAUDS ~ DEBT OF ANOTHER.</p> <p>In an action for money had and received there is sufficient evidence to sustain a verdict of the jury in favor of plaintiff, when the testimony shows that plaintiff expended money in payment of laborers upon defendant’s building upon the promise of defendant that it should be refunded, although the testimony also shows that plaintiff was one of the sureties upon the bond of a defaulting contractor, who had absconded, leaving due to the laborers upon defendant’s building the amount of money so paid out by plaintiff. (Hovt and Stiles, JJ., dissent.)</p> <p>Where a contractor upon a building has absconded, leaving unpaid labor bills, the promise of the owner of the building to a third party that, if he would pay the money due so the work could progress at once, the money should be refunded, is not a promise to answer for the debt of another, and does not therefore fall within the statute of frauds.</p>