History
  • No items yet
midpage
Jones v. Brazile
1 White & W. 121
Tex. App.
1882
Check Treatment

Opinion by

Willson, J.

§ 299. In suit upon a contract, quantum meruit not recoverable. Suit was brought on an account due for *122services “as per contract.” The evidence proved the services rendered as claimed, but proved at the same time that the services were performed without any contract or understanding between the parties as to the amount of pay plaintiff was to receive. In other words, plaintiff sued upon a specific contract, and, failing to pi’ove such contract, has recovered upon a quantum meruit. This is error. The plaintiff must recover, if at all, upon the cause of action declared upon. [Gammage v. Alexander, 14 Tex. 414; Chrisman v. Miller, 15 Tex. 160; Denison v. League, 16 Tex. 406; Lemmon v. Hanley, 28 Tex. 219; Hall & Jones v. Jackson, 3 Tex. 305.]

October 28, 1882.

Reversed and remanded.

Case Details

Case Name: Jones v. Brazile
Court Name: Court of Appeals of Texas
Date Published: Oct 28, 1882
Citation: 1 White & W. 121
Docket Number: No. 2372, R. Book No. 4, p. 265
Court Abbreviation: Tex. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.