Rehearing Denied March 10, 1949.
Appeal from Superior Court, Maricopa County; W. C. Truman, Judge.
See also 64 Ariz. 299, 169 P.2d 855.
Judgment in first four causes of action reversed and remanded for new trial, and judgment as to second cause of action reversed with directions.
Claude E. Spriggs, of Phoenix, for appellant.
Baker & Whitney and George M. Sterling, all of Phoenix, for appellee.
Stanford, Justice. LaPrade, C. J., and Udall, Phelps, and De Concini, JJ., concur.
[68 Ariz. 141] In the trial court Beck sued Brown. Herein we will style Beck (appellee) as plaintiff, and Brown (appellant)as defendant.
Action was brought on seven causes of action. The fifth and sixth causes of action were dismissed by the court on plaintiff Beck's motion at the close of his case.
The first cause of action according to the complaint was upon an implied contract for the payment of the sum of $ 3100 for work, labor and services performed by plaintiff for defendant on a quantum meruit basis, no dates being set forth for the commencement or completion of the work. Plaintiff claims the second, third and fourth causes of action were for damages for conversion of certain personal property of the value of $ 600, $ 700 and $ 560, respectively. Plaintiff claimed by his seventh cause of action that the sum of $ 1200 was due him from defendant for building and equipment sold by him to defendant.
Defendant Brown answered and counterclaimed against plaintiff as to the first cause of action alleging that plaintiff went to work for him on the 3rd day of September, 1944, to discharge an indebtedness due him from plaintiff in the sum of $ 2180.55, and by reason of plaintiff's labor he earned $ 937.50 for services rendered until the 10th day of March, 1945. After defendant deducted social security payments and income tax withheld in the sum of $ 235.63 a balance of $ 701.87 was left earned by plaintiff toward the reduction of the indebtedness owed by him to defendant. Defendant claimed also to have advanced money and paid debts for plaintiff in the further sum of $ 730.75; that defendant salvaged certain property turned over to him by plaintiff valued at $ 785, and after allowing credit for salvage alleged the sum of $ 1424.43 is due defendant by plaintiff.
[68 Ariz. 142] On the second cause of action defendant claimed moneys were due him for storing building material for plaintiff in defendant's building in Deming, New Mexico; that the trucks of defendant were used in effecting such storage; that said building materials so stored were worth not to exceed $ 200; that for use of trucks belonging to defendant plaintiff owes drayage in the sum of $ 25; that for such storage plaintiff owed defendant the sum of $ 240, or $ 265 in all.
On the third cause of action defendant generally denied the indebtedness, but claimed that in August, 1944, plaintiff transported to Clifton, Arizona, from Deming, New Mexico, and to Safford, Arizona from Deming, New Mexico, certain personal property including sundry auto parts which defendant believes to be of the value of $ 200; that said auto parts have been in storage in Clifton and Safford in properties belonging to defendant and that a reasonable storage value is $ 40 per month, totaling $ 480; that the truckage of said auto parts amounted to the sum of $ 155, and that there is a total of $ 635 due this defendant on this counterclaim.
As to the fourth cause of action defendant denies the indebtedness of $ 560 or any sum and alleges that in August, 1944, plaintiff left certain tools and equipment for storage with defendant. The defendant believes the value of said property to be $ 100; that a reasonable ...