Opinion ID: 1841190
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: The Central Judgment

Text: The Joneses allege that the judgment in favor of Central and against them is erroneous and contrary to the great weight of the evidence. Central installed the heating and air conditioning in the Jones home. Nelson Free, a partner in Central, testified: Q. Did anyone come by at any point and ask you to complete the work? A. Yes, sir. Q. Who came by? A. Mr. Jones came by my office. Q. And when did this occur? A. It was severalif I may elaborate, Mr. Jones at the time was a police officer and on patrol he would stop by the office several times. Or he had stopped by several times to ask us to complete the air-conditioning at his house. Q. And what was your response to Mr. Jones's request? A. We refused to at the first instance. Q. When you say first instance, on how many instances are we talking about? A. If memory serves, I believe it was three or four times he stopped by the office. Q. Were there any subsequent instances to the four or five times that he did come buy and ask you and you did refuse? A. I don't follow you. Q. What if anything caused you to go out on the job site again? A. What refused us to? Q. What if anything caused you to go out on the job site again? A. I'm sorry, I couldn't understand you. Q. Following the times that Mr. Jones came by your office and you testified that you refused to go back out and complete the work, what if anything happened to make you change your mind? A. Oh, okay. Mr. Jones as I said had come by and he asked that we finish the air-conditioning work. And if I remember I told him that we had heard from other subs that Mr. Hargrove was not paying the bills. And so he said that he wanted to know how much was left owing us and so I told him. And he said well if you'll finish I'll pay you. Q. Now, were those his exact words? A. To the best of my knowledge. He said if Mr. Hargrove doesn't pay you I'll pay you if you'll finish it. Q. On that basis did you enter in to the premises again and perform services? A. Yes, sir. . . . . Q. What is the amount of the indebtedness that you've claimed is owed you by virtue of this work which you filed in small claims and appealed here? A. I believe it is $587. This evidence is sufficient to support a finding by the trial court in favor of Central and against the Joneses on the count for work and labor done. To summarize, the judgments in favor of Tillery, Brown, Central, Rawls, and Henry against the Joneses are affirmed. The judgments against the Federal Land Bank of New Orleans in favor of Henry, Brown, Rawls, and the Joneses are reversed, except that the judgment requiring the Bank to account to the Joneses for interest charged on the sum interpleaded is affirmed. The judgment requiring the Bank to pay attorney's fees out of the interpleaded funds is reversed and the cause remanded for the trial court to determine to whom the interpleaded funds should be paid. Accordingly, the judgments are affirmed in part, reversed in part, and the cause remanded. AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS. TORBERT, C.J., and MADDOX, JONES and SHORES, JJ., concur.