Crotts

This ease was tried by the court sitting without a jury and judgment went in favor of plaintiff for the sum of $76, the prayer of the complaint being for the sum of $865. Plaintiff made a motion for new trial, which was denied, and thereafter appealed.

Evidence was introduced by plaintiff at the trial without objection to the effect that plaintiff’s assignor and defendants entered into an oral agreement whereby the former was to prepare plans and superintend the construction of a building for ten per cent of the cost thereof. A difference arose between the parties. Appellant contends that this difference was absolved by an agreement that the ten per cent arrangement should remain unchanged, but that in addition appellant’s assignor was to act as foreman working on the job, for which he was to receive one dollar per hour. Respondents contend that the one dollar per hour as foreman was to be the sole compensation moving to appellant’s assignor. The latter acted as foreman throughout the construction, and actually received the full compensation of one dollar per hour, excepting a balance of some $15.

The first paragraph of the court’s findings is to the effect that the original…