Laver v. Hotaling

Citations

• 5 Cal. Unrep. 534
• 46 P. 1070
• 1896 Cal. LEXIS 1089

Syllabus

<p>Services of Architects—Evidence of Value.—In an Action by Architects to recover for services, evidence of a rule of compensation of architects established by architects’ institutes and associations is not admissible when not accompanied by any proof that the rule was known to defendant at the time of the alleged contract, or that it was so generally accepted by the public as to 'give it the standing of a custom, knowledge of which was to be imputed to him.1</p> <p>Evidence—Waiver of Objections.—Where plaintiff testified on the direct examination as to an alleged custom, defendant did not waive his objections to such evidence by cross-examining plaintiff thereon, or calling witnesses to disprove it.2</p>