Southern Industrial Institute v. Hellier

• Decision Date: 17 February 1905
• Parties: SOUTHERN INDUSTRIAL INSTITUTE v. HELLIER.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

39 So. 163

142 Ala. 686

SOUTHERN INDUSTRIAL INSTITUTE v. HELLIER.

Supreme Court of Alabama

February 17, 1905

Appeal from Circuit Court, Tallapoosa County; N. D. Denson, Judge.

Action by F. O. Hellier against the Southern Industrial Institute. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

This was an action of assumpsit, brought by appellee, F. O Hellier, against the Southern Industrial Institute, to recover an amount due appellee from the defendant for services rendered as a teacher in said institute. The defendant pleaded the general issue, and by way of special pleas set up the defense that it was not indebted to the plaintiff in the manner and form as alleged; that it had paid the debt; that, while plaintiff was employed as teacher in the defendant's school, he lost considerable time from said school; and that the value of the time so lost was offered as a set-off, or in recoupment of the amount claimed by plaintiff. On the trial of the cause plaintiff introduced testimony tending to show that he had rendered services as a teacher to the defendant under a contract of employment, and that he had not been paid the full amount due him, and that the amount claimed in this suit was a balance due. The defendant introduced testimony tending to show that, while plaintiff was in its employ as a teacher, by reason of sickness he lost considerable time. In rebuttal, the plaintiff introduced testimony showing that during the time he was sick his wife, Mrs. Hellier, taught for him and in his stead, and that during the time she taught for him she was not employed by the defendant as a teacher. There was testimony introduced that Mrs. Hellier had, during part of the time of plaintiff's employment, been employed as a teacher in said school. The other facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion. Upon the introduction of all the evidence, the defendant requested the court to give to the jury the following written charges, and duly excepted to its refusal to give said charges as requested: "(1) The court charges the jury that, if they believe the evidence in this case, they cannot find for the plaintiff for any amount on account of services rendered by Mrs. Hellier during the fall of 1901. (2) The court charges the jury that the plaintiff cannot recover anything for the salary of Mrs Hellier during the time she was employed as a teacher by the defendant. (3) If the jury believe that the amount of plaintiff's account has been paid down to less than $100 and if they further find that he lost one month's time out of the school during the fall of 1901, while the school was in session, then the plaintiff cannot recover, and your verdict will be for the defendant." There was a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant made a motion for a new trial on...