Case ID: mo-app_102/html/0423-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "ELLISON, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STELLA C. HOLMAN, by Next Friend, Respondent, v. THE PINTO CREEK MINING & SMELTING COMPANY, Appellant.
    Kansas City Court of Appeals,
    November 9, 1903.
    Demurrer to Evidence: INFANT’S SERVICES: FATHER’S CONTRACT: JURY QUESTION. On a demurrer to the evidence, the court and the jury may consider not only the direct evidence in plaintiff’s behalf, but make every reasonable inference to be drawn therefrom; and held, that a verdict for an infant should stand, notwithstanding evidence of her father’s contract that she should work without compensation.
    Appeal from Buchanan Circuit Court. — How. W. K. James, Judge.
    Affirmed.
    
      Grant S. Watkins and A. 8. Dickson for appellant.
    (1) The cause should be reversed because there is no evidence in the case, upon which to base a verdict,and the judgment was rendered outside of the issues framed by the pleadings and supported by the evidence, is improper, and should be reversed. Smith v. St. Louis Transit Co., 92 Mo. App. 41. (2) The verdict is manifestly against the law and the evidence, and the verdict should be reversed. Roman v. Boston Trading Co., 87 Mo. App. 183. (3) The court erred in overruling the general demurrer to the evidence offered by the defendant at the close of plaintiff’s case, because there was no evidence on which to base a verdict against the defendant. Baustian v. Young, 152 Mo. 317.
    
      
      G. O. Holman for respondent.
   ELLISON, J.

This action is for personal services and was begun before a justice of the peace and was taken to the circuit court on appeal where plaintiff had judgment for forty dollars.

The best we can gather from a meager and imperfect record is that plaintiff bases her right to the judgment in her favor on the ground that she did work for defendant as a stenographer which was accepted by defendant and for which she has never been paid. The defense does not deny the performance of the work but contends that it was to be done gratuitously and that her father agreed that it should be.

The record brought here by defendant leaves much to conjecture and the plaintiff has not filed anything to help the matter. We do not find anything in the record which would justify us in overturning the judgment. There was evidence from which the jury could well base the verdict. The demurrer to the testimony allowed the court and jury not only to consider the. direct evidence in plaintiff’s behalf, but permitted every reasonable inference to be drawn therefrom. When so-considered, the verdict should be supported, notwithstanding defendant’s contention that plaintiff was an infant and that her father agreed that her work should not be charged for.

We think the court’s action on the instructions was correct and that the case was properly submitted. Judgment affirmed.

All concur.