Hall v. Luckman
| Decision Date | 06 March 1907 |
| Citation | 110 N.W. 916,133 Iowa 518 |
| Parties | HALL v. LUCKMAN. |
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
In an action pending in the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Iowa, each party was authorized to select a stenographer to take depositions to be used in said cause. The defendant herein was a party to said litigation, and through his attorney employed the plaintiff, Miss Hall, to serve in that capacity. Plaintiff performed the required service, taking a large amount of testimony, much of which work was done at points outside of the state. For this service defendant has paid the plaintiff the sum of $399.50, which is the equivalent of 10 cents per folio for the depositions taken in stenographic notes and transcribed in longhand. Plaintiff also furnished the defendant, at his request, a copy of the testimony so taken, or of some of it, and to recover payment of this latter service she brought this action at law. There was a judgment in her favor and the defendant appeals.
At a prior term of this court an opinion was handed down sustaining the appeal and ordering a new trial (see 107 N. W. 932); but, a petition for rehearing having been granted, the opinion has been withdrawn and the cause resubmitted upon further argument. It is the claim of the plaintiff, and there was evidence tending to show, that she was employed with the understanding that the legal fee or compensation for taking depositions in the federal court was 20 cents per folio; and that, after this understanding had been reached, the defendant's counsel suggested his desire for a copy of a part of the testimony, saying that the job was a large one, and that no additional charge ought to be made for the copy. To this suggestion plaintiff says she assented on the basis of the agreement that she was to receive 20 cents per folio for the depositions. It is the defendant's contention that plaintiff agreed to take the depositions at 10 cents per folio, or the legal fee if more, and to furnish the desired copy without extra charge. As it turned out the legal fee for taking depositions as fixed by the federal court was found to be 10 cents per folio.
The pleadings appear to be broad enough to permit the plaintiff to recover upon a quantum meruit if the evidence should justify it, and the trial below seems to have proceeded on that theory. There is a sharp conflict in the testimony as to the conversation between the parties concerning the terms of the employment, and, while the preponderance in the number of witnesses is with the defendant, a finding in favor of the plaintiff's contention is not without substantial support. It is an elementary general proposition that for labor done by one person at the request of another the law implies a promise by the latter to pay the reasonable value for the service performed. As the request for the service and its performance were admitted by the defendant, the burden was on him to show that plaintiff undertook to furnish the copy gratuitously, or that she agreed to furnish both original and copy at the single rate of 10 cents, or the legal fee, per folio. This, in the judgment of the jury, he did not succeed in showing, and, as we have already said, the verdict finds support in the evidence. Plaintiff swears that she undertook to supply the copy without extra charge only upon the understanding and theory that she was to receive 20 cents per folio for the depositions. The testimony on the part of defendant is that she agreed to supply it without extra charge in consideration of the receipt of 10 cents per folio, or the legal fee if more than...
To continue reading
Request your trial