Morrissey v. Faucett
Citations
- 28 Wash. 52
- 68 P. 352
- 1902 Wash. LEXIS 455
Syllabus
<p>PLEADING-AMENDMENT AT TRIAL.</p> <p>The action of the court in permitting plaintiff at the close of the testimony to amend her complaint so as to correspond to the proof was not error, where defendant’s answer theretofore filed had negatived the truth of the matters set up in the amendment and evidence upon both sides had been directed to that issue.</p> <p>WORK AND LABOR-CONTINUOUS CONTRACT-LIMITATIONS.</p> <p>Where services are rendered under a. contract for an indefinite time, with no period of payment specified, the employment is a continuous one a&d the statute of limitations will not begin to run against an action to recover compensation until the services are ended. (Ah How v. Furth, 13 Wash. 550, followed.)</p> <p>SAME-TRIAL-CROSS-EXAMINATION.</p> <p>In an action by plaintiff to recover for services rendered about the house and farm of her brother, with whom she lived for a number of years after attaining majority, where she had testified that during a portion of the time a renter had charge of the cows and was supposed to do the milking, but that she sometimes voluntarily helped him, it was not error for the court to exclude cross-examination as to whether the work she did by way of milking the cows while a renter had charge was voluntary on her part and not required by her brother.</p> <p>SAME-SERVICES BY SISTER FOR BROTHER-IMPLIED CONTRACT-QUESTION FOR JURY.</p> <p>Where domestic services are rendered by one member of a family to another, it is not necessary in an action to recover compensation to prove the terms of a direct and positive contract, hut proof may be made of words and conduct of the parties and of circumstances from which the inference may follow that there was an understanding the services were not to be gratuitous; and it is for the jury to say from such evidence whether there was in fact such an understanding or agreement.</p> <p>SAME-TIME OF BEGINNING SERVICES-EVIDENCE.</p> <p>In an action by a sister to recover for services rendered
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- where a mortgage is assigned and the record of the mortgage is unauthorizedly cancelled, a second mortgage executed and assigned after the cancellation has no priority over the assignee of the first mortgage
- \[A]n unauthorized cancellation on the record of a mortgage does not destroy the lien of the unsatisfied mortgage or affect the rights of a bona fide holder for value who does nothing to mislead or deceive subsequent purchasers or mortgagees.\
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Hadley
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.