Thomas v. Thomas

Citations

• 105 Wash. 127
• 177 P. 680
• 1919 Wash. LEXIS 528

Syllabus

<p>Master and Servant (17)—Action for Wages—Evidence—Sufficiency. A verdict allowing $45 per month for services is not excessive, the question being for the jury, where plaintiff worked as a cook and farm hand, the going wages for which were from $25 to $45 per month, and also worked long hours and performed other duties requiring more skill.</p> <p>Work and Labor (4, 14)—Services Between Persons in Family Relation—Evidence—Sufficiency. A finding of an express contract of employment of a son and brother-in-law to work on a farm as cook and farm hand is sustained by evidence that he performed the labor under the understanding that defendants intended to pay him satisfactory wages.</p> <p>Same (11)—Pleading—Issues, Proof and Variance. In an action for wages for services performed on a farm by a son and brother-in-law, evidence of talk of payment by deeding an interest in the farm is unavailing where it was not affirmatively pleaded in the answer.</p> <p>Trial (83, 100)—Instructions—Request. The designation of instructions as requested by either party, while not commendable, is not error, although commented on by counsel, where the jury was instructed to consider the instructions as a whole, and were not unduly influenced.</p> <p>Trial (17)—Reception of Evidence—Matters Not Controverted. It is not error to exclude evidence upon an issue which was admitted in open court and not denied by answer.</p>