Leonard v. Benfield

• Decision Date: 23 November 1955
• Docket Number: No. 524,524
• Citation: 243 N.C. 169,90 S.E.2d 240
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court
• Parties: Richard I. LEONARD v. Fletcher BENFIELD, trading and doing business as Randolph Electric Motor Company.

Page 240

90 S.E.2d 240

243 N.C. 169

Richard I. LEONARD v. Fletcher BENFIELD, trading and doing business as Randolph Electric Motor Company.

No. 524

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Nov. 23, 1955

Ottway Burton, Asheboro, for plaintiff appellant.

R. E. Bencini, Jr., High Point, Hal H. Walker, Asheboro, for defendant appellee.

DEVIN, Justice.

We think the plaintiff has offered evidence sufficient to carry the case to the jury and that there was error in allowing the motion for judgment of nonsuit.

While the plaintiff testified he was employed as manager of defendant's business in Asheboro at a salary of $100 per week, he alleged and offered evidence tending to show that the work week contemplated 44 hours and that it was agreed that for overtime plaintiff should have additional compensation. The amount of such additional compensation, if any, in the absence of specific agreement, would be the reasonable worth of the services rendered. Turner v. Marsh Furniture Co., 217 N.C. 695, 9 S.E.2d 379; Ray v. Robinson, 216 N.C. 430, 5 S.E.2d 127; Sawyer v. Cox, 215 N.C. 241, 1 S.E.2d 562.

Consequent upon the allowance of defendant's motion for judgment of nonsuit at close of plaintiff's testimony the defendant offered no evidence. On another hearing other facts may appear, but on this record plaintiff was entitled to have his case submitted to the jury.

Reversed.

HIGGINS, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

The foregoing opinion was prepared by DEVIN, Emergency Justice, while he was serving in place of HIGGINS, J., who was absent on account of his physical condition. It is now adopted by the Court and ordered filed.