Wilson v. Lile

Citations

• 1 Monag. 199
• 16 A. 861
• 1889 Pa. LEXIS 1305

Syllabus

<p>In an action of assumpsit for wages, under a contract of hiring, the terms of the contract were in dispute. The servant testified that the contract washy the day at twenty-five cents an hour. The master testified that the contract-was hy the month, to work ten hours a day at twenty-five cents an hour. The servant denied that the length of the day was agreed upon. The defendant-requested the court to charge that, “if the jury find that the employment was for service for ten hours each day, and that the plaintiff worked only for a portion of the ten hours of each day, he canhot recover for the hours he did work, unless he was prevented from working hy the interference or neglect of the defendant.” The eourtrefused this request to charge and instructed the jury that, “ according to the contract, as stated hy the defendant, ten hours was to constitute a day; yet it provided that he was to he paid twenty-five cents an hour, and this was a qualification of that part of the contract calling for ten hours a day and entitled the plaintiff to recover for the time actually made.” Held, to he error.</p>