Case: F. H. REDWARD v. J. O. LUTTED
Abbreviation: Redward v. Lutted
Court: Supreme Court of the Territory of Hawaii
Jurisdiction: Hawaii
Decision Date: 1904-02-20
Docket Number: 
Citation: 15 Haw. 431
Volume: 15
Reporter: Hawaii Reports
Parties: F. H. REDWARD v. J. O. LUTTED.
Pages: 431–431

F. H. REDWARD v. J. O. LUTTED.
EXCEPTIONS FROM ClRCuiT C0URT, ElRST ClRCuiT.
Submitted February 13, 1904.
Decided February 20, 1904.
Erear, C.J., Galbraith AND Perry, JJ.
The evidence in this case is held sufficient to sustain a finding that there was no express contract for moving a house for a less sum than that sued for on a quantum meruit.
W. T. Rawlins for plaintiff.
Andrews & Andrade for defendant.

OPINION OF THE COURT BY
FREAR, C.J.
Assumpsit for $281.49 for moving a bouse. Defense that there was an express contract for $150. The District Magistrate so found, but on appeal the Circuit Court, jury waived, found for the full amount claimed. The question now raised by the exceptions is whether there was sufficient evidence to sustain the finding. It is probably true, as contended for the defendant, that when he testified that there was no contract, he meant no written contract and not no oral contract for $150, but, although he, the defendant, contends that there was an oral contract for $150 the plaintiff testified positively that there was no contract at all, but merely 'an offhand rough estimate or guess as to the probable cost of moving the building, before the defendant purchased it or engaged the plaintiff to move it.
The exceptions are overruled.