Case ID: minn_57/html/0114-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Ole Quelprud vs. C. H. Kothe.
    Submitted on briefs April 9, 1894
    Affirmed April 20, 1894.
    No. 8462.
    Verdict supported by the evidence.
    The evidence in this case was sufficient to justify the verdict.
    Appeal by defendant, C. H. Kothe, from an order of the District Court of Bock County, P. E. Brown, J., made May 12, 1893, refusing his application for a new trial.
    The plaintiff, Ole Quelprud, worked for defendant as servant on his farm from March 25, to September 19, 1892, at $22 per month. He brought this action to recover $88.65 the unpaid balance of his wages. Defendant claimed that he had paid the man in full. The jury found for the plaintiff. A motion for a new trial was made by defendant, but was denied and he appeals.
    
      A. J. Daley, for appellant.
    
      L. S. Nelson, for respondent.
   Per Curiam.

As was stated by the court below in its charge to the jury, no exception being taken thereto, the only dispute between the parties was whether plaintiff had been paid in full for his services, and on this the finding was in his favor. There was evidence reasonably tending to support the verdict, for we do not agree with counsel for defendant in his assertion that plaintiff’s testimony was so inconsistent, improbable, and contradictory that it should have been wholly rejected.

Order affirmed.

(Opinion published 58 N. W. 682.)