Telfer v. Lambert

• Decision Date: 04 March 1910
• Citation: 79 N.J.L. 299,75 A. 779
• Parties: TELFER et al. v. LAMBERT.
• Court: New Jersey Supreme Court

75 A. 779

79 N.J.L. 299

TELFER et al.

v. LAMBERT.

Supreme Court of New Jersey.

March 4, 1910.

Appeal from District Court of Elizabeth.

Action by James D. Telfer and others against Clement G. Lambert, doing business as the Elizabeth Machine & Iron Works. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant appeals. Reversed.

Argued November term, 1909, before REED, BERGEN, and MINTURN, JJ.

Samuel Koestler, for appellant.

Abe J. David, for appellees.

REED, J. This action was brought by the plaintiff to recover for work and materials done and furnished by the plaintiff in repairing two boilers on a boat called the "Antoinette." The work was done for the defendant, who seems to have been engaged in general work in repairing the boat.

The state of the case shows that on the trial Mr. Telfer, of the firm of Telfer & Genz, plaintiffs, testified that on May 13, 1909, Mr. Lambert, the defendant, asked him (Telfer) what the wages were for repairing boilers, and said that there were two boilers to do, and that Mr. Telfer told him 60 cents an hour, and 30 cents for labor, and double these prices for work done between 12 o'clock noon on Saturday and Monday. Mr. Telfer further testified that the next day Lambert told him (Telfer) to go to to work on Saturday noon, and that Telfer guaranteed to have the work on the boilers done by Sunday night at 12 o'clock. Teller further testified that they started to work on Saturday afternoon at 3 o'clock, and they worked until 6 o'clock, then stopped for supper, after which they worked from 7 to 10:45 at night; that they started again on Sunday morning at 7 o'clock, and worked until 12:45 noon, had lunch, then worked from 1 until 6 p. m., then, after 20 minutes recess, worked until between 11 and 12 o'clock on Sunday night. Mr. Genz, the partner of the plaintiff testified that they worked six hours on Saturday, and worked on Sunday from 7 o'clock until noon, then quit an hour, then worked until 6 o'clock, and then from 6:30 until 11 o'clock Sunday night. Genz says: "When we started to work, we knew we would start Saturday afternoon, and the work would take until Sunday night." At the close of the plaintiff's case there was a motion for nonsuit on the ground that there was an express contract to perform part of the work on Sunday, and because under the contract a part of the work was performed on Sunday. The motion was overruled. On the part of the defense Mr. Lambert testified that he had told Telfer, on Thursday, May 13th, that he (Lambert) had work to do to line some furnaces; that Telfer asked wages at the rate of 60 cents an hour straight time, and $1.20 for double time; that he (Lambert) told Telfer that he was doing the work on contract, and was not getting double time, and that Telfer said: "All right, he would do it on straight time." Lambert says he told him he expected he must work on Sunday, and that he would let Dahman know when he was to go to work. Dahman was the keeper of the cafe where the conversation took place....