Reeves v. Kinney

California Court of Appeal · Civ. No. 943. · 1911-05-05 · Published · 116 P. 309 · 16 Cal. App. 156 · 1911 Cal. App. LEXIS 162

M. A. REEVES, Respondent, v. ABBOT KINNEY, Appellant

Proceeding: appeal from an order
Trial court: Superior Court of Los Angeles County
Trial judge: N. P. Conrey
Outcome: affirmed — the order is affirmed.
Area: civil
Panel: Shaw (author)

Analysis

No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.

Opinion — Shaw

SHAW, J.

Action to recover for services alleged to have been rendered at the special instance and request of defendant. Judgment went for plaintiff. Defendant appeals from an order of court denying his motion for a new trial. His sole contention is that the finding of the court is not supported by the evidence.

The evidence clearly supports the finding. It tends to prove that plaintiff, while in charge of the Country Clubhouse at Ocean Park and conducting a restaurant in connection therewith, was requested by defendant to furnish to the. members of certain designated parties accustomed to gather at said club-house lunches and such refreshments as they might require, the actual cost of which should be charged to defendant, who promised and agreed to pay the same each *157 month; that plaintiff performed the services and furnished the refreshments so requested, charging therefor actual cost; that she rendered defendant a final statement of account in the sum of $525.70, which was the actual cost to her of furnishing said lunches and refreshments, and requested him to pay the amount thereof, which he agreed to pay on the following Saturday, but failed to do so, promising it at a future date. Defendant never disputed the bill, but failed to pay the same. The fact that the testimony of the plaintiff is contradicted by defendant constitutes no ground for reversing the order of the court in denying a new trial.

There is no merit in the appeal, and the order is affirmed.

Allen, P. J., and James, J., concurred.