Perry

Perry v. Noonan Loan Co.

Good Law
1 Cal. App. 609·1905 Cal. App. LEXIS 178·82 P. 623
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 20, 1905No. 61.California858 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Harrison, J.

This action was brought to recover the value of services rendered by the plaintiff to the defendant during the two years prior to the commencement of the action, the amount claimed being six thousand dollars. The -cause was tried by a jury, and a verdict rendered in favor of the plaintiff for $1,520. Thereafter the court granted the defendant’s motion for a new trial “on the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence to justify the verdict rendered herein. ’ ’ From this order the plaintiff has appealed. Being an action of quantum meruit, the amount to be recovered depended upon the testimony of witnesses as to the value of the services, and on this point there was a marked conflict in the testimony. In his complaint the plaintiff alleged their value to be two hundred and fifty dollars per month, and at the trial there was testimony on his behalf placing their value at different sums from two hundred and fifty to three hundred dollars per month, while on the part of the defendant witnesses placed their value at from sixty-five to one hundred and fifty dollars per month. There was also testimony tending to show that the plaintiff had been paid a large portion, if not all, of the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.