Buhman v. Becker

VANCLIEF, C. Action to recover from defendant the reasonable value of work and labor alleged to have been performed by plaintiff for and at the request of defendant in cultivating a tract of defendant’s land, on which was a vineyard, during the years A. D. 1891 and 1892, and in constructing upon said land a dwelling-house and a barn, and in manufacturing boxes and trays in which to cure and store raisins produced from said vineyard; and also to recover the value of the lumber and other materials furnished and used by plaintiff in the construction of said house and barn, and in manufacturing said boxes and trays. The amount for which plaintiff prays judgment is an alleged unpaid balance of $4,345.27. The defendant denied that the alleged labor was performed or the materials furnished at his request, and denied that he promised to pay for either. He also filed a cross-complaint, alleging that he leased said tract of land and said vineyard to plaintiff at a rental of $500 per annum, and that plaintiff occupied and cultivated the land and vineyard during said term as a tenant under said lease; that there was due from plaintiff to defendant $1,000 for rent, and also $2,104.73 for money which, at the special instance and request of the plaintiff, the defendant had expended and paid out in erecting improvements on said leased premises, and for conducting the business of raising grapes thereon, which the plaintiff promised to pay out of the proceeds of the first grape crop, but which he has wholly failed to pay; and for these sums, amounting to $3,104.73, the defendant prays judgment against the plaintiff. The court found that plaintiff had performed the labor and furnished the. materials at the instance of defendant, as alleged in the complaint, and that the answer and cross-complaint of defendant were wholly untrue, except that defendant had paid to plaintiff during said term sums of money amounting to $1,722.73, but further found a balance due plaintiff from defendant of $2,104.65, for which judgment was rendered against defendant. Defendant appeals from the judgment on a bill of exceptions as to matters of law and fact.

[174]I think the evidence justifies the findings of fact. Without conflict it shows that plaintiff! performed the labor and furnished the materials, as alleged in the complaint, at the instance of the defendant, and that such labor and materials were reasonably worth as much as they were estimated to be worth by the court. Nor was there any dispute that defendant had advanced to plaintiff $1,722.73, for which the court gave defendant credit. As to the additional credit of $382 claimed by defendant, the preponderance of evidence was clearly against him. On the issue as to a lease of the land to plaintiff, the direct express testimony was conflicting, and about evenly balanced; but the circumstantial evidence was altogether in favor of the plaintiff.