Ingram v. Southern Ry. Co
Citation | 152 N.C. 762,67 S.E. 926 |
Parties | INGRAM v. SOUTHERN RY. CO. |
Decision Date | 20 April 1910 |
Court | United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina |
1. Parent and Child (§ 16*)—Emancipation of Child—Right to Wages.
Where a minor is employed with the approval of his father, and the contract contemplates that the son shall receive the wages earned by him, the agreement is, in effect, an emancipation of the son as to the wages earned under the contract which thereby belonged to the son.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Parent and Child, Cent. Dig. §§ 167, 171; Dec. Dig. § 16.*]
2. Parent and Child (§ 16*)—Services of Child—Emancipation.
Where a minor contracts on his own account for his services with the knowledge of his parent and without the parent's objection, there is an implied emancipation, entitling the son to his earnings in his own right.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Parent and Child, Cent. Dig. §§ 167, 171; Dec. Dig. § 16.*]
Appeal from Superior Court, Iredell County; Long, Judge.
Action by Giles Ingram against the Southern Railway Company for loss of services of plaintiff's son for two years preceding his majority because of the son's injury by defendant's alleged negligence. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed
These issues were submitted:
George W. Garland and Armfield & Turner, for appellant. L. C. Caldwell, for appellee.
We find no error in the rulings of the court below. There is ample evidence tending to prove an emancipation by the parent of the son. It is well settled that if a contract of employment is made by a minor and approved and confirmed by his father, and under such contract the son is to receive the wages earned by him, the father by approving and confirming the agreement in effect emancipates his son as to wages earned by him under the contract, which becomes the property of the son, and not the property of the father. Pardey v. American Ship Windlass Co., 19 R. I. 461, 34 Atl. 737. If a minor son contracts on his own account for his services with the knowledge of his father, who makes no objection thereto, there is an implied emancipation and an assent that the son shall be entitled to the earnings in his own right. Burdsall v. Waggoner, 4 Colo. 261; ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Smith v. Simpson, 454
...Jolley v. Western Union Telegraph Co., 204 N.C. 136, 167 S.E. 575; Lowrie v. Oxendine, 153 N.C. 267, 69 S.E. 131; Ingram v. Southern Railroad, 152 N.C. 762, 67 S.E. 926. With respect to emancipation and the purchase of an automobile, the facts in James v. James, 226 N.C. 399, 38 S.E.2d 168,......
- Jolley v. Western Union Tel. Co
-
Jolley v. Western Union Telegraph Co.
... ... The ... doctrine of implied emancipation is fully recognized in this ... state. Thus, in Ingram v ... [167 S.E. 577.] ... Southern ... R. Co., 152 N.C. 762, 67 S.E. 926, the court said: "It ... is well settled that if a ... ...
-
Lowrie v. Oxendine
...had been emancipated by his father and permitted to work for himself and to receive the earnings of his labor. In Ingram v. Railway, 152 N. C. 762, 67 S. E. 926, we held that: "If a minor son contracts on his own account for his services with the knowledge of his father, who makes no object......