Case ID: mich_33/html/0084-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Marston, J:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

George W. Wyman and others v. John Crowley.
    
      Practice: Abandonment of special count: Common counts. A plaintiff who has annexed the common counts to a special count upon a contract of employment, may on the trial abandon his special count, and seek to recover on the common counts.
    
      Employment: Evidence: Verdict. Where there was evidence tending to show a promise made by an authorized agent of defendant to pay plaintiff a given sum for his services, and the facts have been properly submitted to the jury, who have found for the plaintiff, their verdict is final and conclusive.
    
      Submitted on briefs October 27.
    
    
      Decided November 2.
    
    Error to Mason. Circuit.
    This was an action of assumpsit brought by Crowley against Eber B. Ward in justice’s court, and taken by appeal to the circuit. The action was for the value of services performed by plaintiff. The declaration contained a special count and the common counts, but before going to the jury plaintiff withdrew the special count. Plaintiff recovered and defendant brought error. Ward having died, the suit was revived in the name of his executors.
    
      II. M. Neioconibe, for plaintiffs in error.
    
      S. D. Haight, for defendant in error.
   Marston, J:

We have examined the several assignments set forth in the record in this case, and are satisfied that no error was committed. The plaintiff in the court below had a right to abandon the special count, and seek to recover on the common counts. There was evidence tending to show a promise made by an authorized agent of the defendant to pay the plaintiff one hundred dollars for his services. The question was properly submitted to the jury, and they having* found for tbe plaintiff, tbeir verdict is final. We do not consider the questions raised of sufficient importance to demand separate examinations.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

The other Justices concurred.