Respondent employee filed an action upon a quantum meruit to recover the reasonable value of services he performed for appellant employer. The Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco (California) denied the employer’s motion for nonsuit and entered a judgment in favor of the employee. The employer appealed.
Nakase Law Firm provides more information on how to expose a child molestor
Overview
An employee performed services for the employer in connection with the exploitation of a patented machine. The employee filed an action upon a quantum meruit against the employer to recover the value of the services performed. The trial court denied the employer’s motion for nonsuit and entered a judgment for the employee. The employer appealed and asserted that the refusal of a nonsuit was improper, that the alleged contract was made without authority, that evidence of a statement favorable to the employee was improperly admitted, that evidence that the employer had not made money was improperly excluded, and that the jury instructions were improper. The court held that the refusal of a nonsuit was proper because evidence of the contract was admitted for the purpose of showing that it was entered into and also to show its terms, a breach, and to recover upon quantum meruit. The court held that statements in favor of the employee were admissible because there was evidence that they were made by the manager de facto of the employer, evidence of the employers financial condition could not defeat the employee’s action, and the jury instructions were proper.
Outcome
The judgment in favor of the employee was affirmed.
