Baker v. Lauterback

Decision Date13 December 1887
Citation68 Md. 64,11 A. 703
PartiesBAKER et al. v. LAUTERBACK.
CourtMaryland Court of Appeals

Appeal from circuit court, Howard county.

Catherine Lauterback, administratrix of John Lauterback, plaintiff, sued Baker Bros. & Co., defendants, to recover balance due for services of deceased. Judgment was rendered for plaintiff for $160, and defendants appealed.

John T. Mason, W. A. Hammond, and E. C. Williams, for appellants. T. C. Weeks, R. D. Johnson, and W. Reynolds, for appellee.

BRYAN, J. John Lauterback entered the service of Baker Bros. & Co. on the first day of March, 1880, and remained in their employment until August, 1883, when he was killed by an accident. He was 20 years of age on the twenty-ninth of March, 1880. His father died some years previously to his entering this service. But it appears that his mother signed a written contract with Baker Bros. & Co., by which she undertook to bind him to them as an apprentice for five years to learn the art and trade of glass-blowing. The contract stipulated that, if the boy was considered competent to learn and be instructed, he was to receive for his services one-half of the rate of wages paid journeymen for similar work for the first four years, and two-thirds of such wages for the fifth year; and it was further stipulated that $200 should be held by the employers out of his wages as security, to be paid at the expiration of the term of the apprenticeship, or forfeited if he should leave their employment for any cause whatever before the expiration of the term of five years. All the wages were paid with the exception of $200, and the present suit was brought by the administratrix of the deceased apprentice against Baker Bros. & Co. to recover this amount. The verdict was for $160.

The contract was not signed by the employers, but only by the mother of the boy. In the view which we have taken of the case, this circumstance is immaterial. A father may bind out his son as an apprentice until he reaches the age of 21 years, provided he pursues the mode authorized by the twentieth section of article 6 of the Code; but a contract of apprenticeship executed by the mother is simply void. The boy would not be obliged to serve according to the terms of such an instrument; nor would the employer, by force of it, acquire any control over him. He did, however, serve for three years and five months, with a full knowledge of the terms of this contract. He knew, therefore, the rate of compensation which his employers expected to pay for his work; it would not then be just that he should receive more. The law would imply a contract on the part of his employers to pay him what his services were reasonably worth. It would not, however, imply a contract on the part of the boy to serve for five years, nor to pay a forfeiture in case he should leave the service before the expiration of that time. A contract of this kind is required, by the fourth section of the statute of frauds, to be in writing. The terms of the statute are that no action shall be brought "upon any agreement that is not to be performed within the space of one year from the making thereof, unless the agreement upon which such action shall be brought, or some memorandum or note thereof, shall be in writing, and signed by the party to be charged therewith, or by some person thereunto by him lawfully authorized." If, therefore, the boy had in express terms made a verbal contract to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 cases
  • Bright v. Ganas
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • 20 Enero 1937
    ... ... specific contract by resorting to the quantum meruit under ... the common counts. Baker v. Lauterbach, 68 Md. 64, ... 11 A. 703; Ellicott v. Turner & Peterson, 4 Md. 476 ... In Hamilton v. Thirston, 93 Md. 213, 48 A. 709, the ... ...
  • Deal v. Wilson
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • 3 Diciembre 1919
    ... ... against the other party, can recover the value of the ... services upon a quantum meruit." ...          Judge ... Bryan, in Baker v. Lauterbach, 68 Md. 64, at page ... 70, 11 A. 703, at page 704, ... [101 S.E. 207] ... expresses the principle with great force and accuracy: ... ...
  • Deal v. Wilson
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • 3 Diciembre 1919
    ...against the other party, can recover the value of the services upon a quantum meruit." Judge Bryan, in Baker v. Lauterbach, 68 Md. 64, at page 70, 11 Atl. 703, at page 704, expresses the principle with great force and accuracy: "It must be observed that, although contracts within the statut......
  • Lipscomb v. Hess, 376
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • 8 Octubre 1969
    ...A.2d 225 (1964); Grant v. Curtin, 199 Md. 363, 86 A.2d 495 (1952); Hamilton v. Thirston, 93 Md. 213, 48 A. 709 (1901); Baker v. Lauterbach, 68 Md. 64, 11 A. 703 (1887). A third possibility is that Hess is correct when he says that Eastover Stores, Inc. v. Minnix, 219 Md. 658, 150 A.2d 884 (......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT