Adamson v. Mattson
| Decision Date | 21 November 1919 |
| Citation | 185 P. 553,32 Idaho 493 |
| Parties | EARNEST D. ADAMSON, Respondent, v. CHARLES G. MATTSON, Appellant |
| Court | Idaho Supreme Court |
APPEAL AND ERROR-INSTRUCTIONS-EVIDENCE.
1. In the absence from the record of the instructions given it will be presumed they fully and fairly stated the law applicable to the facts of the case, and this court will not review the action of the trial judge in refusing to give instructions requested by appellant.
2. It is not error to reject a proffered exhibit which neither tends to establish nor disprove any matter in issue.
3. The record in this case does not disclose that the jury erred in rejecting evidence offered by appellant.
APPEAL from the District Court of the Ninth Judicial District, for Jefferson County. Hon. James G. Gwinn, Judge.
Action on account. Judgment for plaintiff. Affirmed.
Judgment affirmed. Costs awarded to respondent.
C. E Crowley, for Appellant.
A verdict exceeding the highest amount claimed or proved will be set aside as excessive and contrary to the evidence. (Wyman v. Erickson, 35 Minn. 202, 28 N.W. 240; Bell v. Cherrie, 8 Ill.App. 310; 14 Ency. of Pl. & Pr., 762, 763; Miller v. Brown, 82 Iowa 79, 47 N.W 895.)
Wm. P Hemminger, for Respondent.
A clerical error in the calculation of interest or in fixing the date from which interest shall run may be corrected by an amendment. (23 Cyc. 875.) An amendment may be made where the amount of the judgment is in excess of that claimed by the plaintiff in his pleadings. (23 Cyc. 874; Sherwood v. Kyle, 125 Cal. 652, 58 P. 270; Bentley v. Hurlburt, 153 Cal. 796, 96 P. 890.)
Respondent sued for wages earned while employed by appellant as a farm laborer; also for a penalty as provided by C. S., sec. 7381, claiming he was discharged without being paid the wages due him. As a second cause of action he claimed compensation for the use of a horse belonging to him and which he employed in working for appellant.
Appellant admitted hiring respondent, but disputed the amount of wages claimed by him and denied liability for the use of the horse. He alleged he had paid respondent in full, in cash, by merchandise delivered, and by caring for, feeding and pasturing horses belonging to him. In a further answer and counterclaim he asked for judgment for a sum of money claimed to be due to him from respondent for the use of a team and buggy.
The verdict was for plaintiff and defendant has appealed from a judgment based thereon and from an order denying a new trial.
The assignments of error will be grouped as follows: 1. The refusal to give certain requested instructions; 2. Rejection, as evidence of appellant's exhibit No. 3; 3. Insufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict.
The instructions given are not in the record, and there is no showing that the points contained in appellant's requests were not fully and fairly covered in the charge to the jury. In the absence from the record of the instructions, as given, it will be presumed they were not erroneous. (Gumaer v. White Pine etc. Co., 11 Idaho 591, 83 P. 771.)
The record relative to the exhibit is as follows: "At the trial the defendant offered in evidence a copy of a letter which the defendant testified he had mailed to the plaintiff with a check for $ 43.16, and which letter plaintiff testified he had never received; the court ruled said evidence to be incompetent, to which ruling defendant excepted."
There is no dispute about the payment of the $ 43.16 and the only other fact the letter would tend to establish was that appellant offered to arbitrate his claim for feeding respondent's horses. This was not in issue and the exhibit was properly rejected.
The record does not contain the evidence submitted at the trial but in lieu thereof appears a statement of the case which is but a summary of what it is agreed the evidence of the respective parties tended to establish. This statement shows there was testimony introduced by appellant with...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Douglas v. Kenney
...and refused. In this situation, it is presumed that the trial court correctly instructed the jury. (Swan v. Sproat, supra; Adamson v. Mattson, 32 Idaho 493, 185 P. 553; Wright v. Stewart, 32 Idaho 490, 185 P. Discharge by committing magistrate after holding of a preliminary examination is p......
-
Scrivner v. Boise Payette Lumber Co.
...witness, or so wholly unsusceptible to bias as to demand that his statements be given absolute verity as conclusive. (Adamson v. Mattson, 32 Idaho 493, 185 P. 553; Marshall v. Taylor, 168 Mo.App. 240, 153 S.W. We cannot say as a matter of law that the evidence conclusively shows, and that n......
-
Paolini v. Albertson's Inc.
...than in some non-negotiable form such as credits at a company store. Otherwise, one might encounter the situation in Adamson v. Mattson, 32 Idaho 493, 185 P. 553 (1919), where the employer claimed he had paid the employee "in full, in cash, by merchandise delivered, and by caring for, feedi......
-
C. I. T. Corp. v. Hess, 9428
...not applicable where the uncontradicted testimony flows from a witness who has a personal interest in the action. Adamson v. Mattson, 32 Idaho 493, 185 P. 553 (1919); First Nat'l Bank of Shenandoah, Iowa v. Hall, 31 Idaho 167, 169 P. 936 (1917); Anno. 62 A.L.R.2d 1191 (1958). Fraud is never......