49 Mich. 239 | Mich. | 1882
When this case was here before (47 Mich. 236) it was held that the plaintiff was entitled to recover for services performed in drafting ordinances, and for services in aiding the city to collect money of the county, unless such services were intended to be gratuitous. It was also held that the committee appointed by the council had nothing to do with his appointment.
On the present trial, for the purpose of showing that the services were gratuitous, witnesses were asked, against the plaintiff’s objections, and permitted to testify that he made no claim for compensation in conversation with them. This
As the previous ruling of this Court was not observed upon the last trial in the court below, we shall reverse the-judgment rendered, with costs, and direct a new trial.