Jennings v. H. Lutz & Son

New Mexico Supreme Court

Jennings v. H. Lutz & Son

228 P. 888, 30 N.M. 160

CourtNew Mexico Supreme Court

DecidedSeptember 9, 1924

DocketNo. 2834.

StatusPublished

This text of 228 P. 888 (Jennings v. H. Lutz & Son) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Mexico Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Jennings v. H. Lutz & Son, 228 P. 888, 30 N.M. 160 (N.M. 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

PARKER, C. J.

The parties disagreed as to whether appellant was employed as housekeeper for a definite term, or was employed from month to month. The case was tried by the court, and he found the issues for appellees. The evidence was conflicting, but the court’s finding is supported by substantial evidence. Under such circumstances, the finding will not be disturbed.

It follows that the judgment of the court below is correct and should be affirmed, and it is so ordered.

BRATTON and BOTTS, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PARKER, C. J.

The parties disagreed as to whether appellant was employed as housekeeper for a definite term, or was employed from month to month. The case was tried by the court, and he found the issues for appellees. The evidence was conflicting, but the court’s finding is supported by substantial evidence. Under such circumstances, the finding will not be disturbed.

It follows that the judgment of the court below is correct and should be affirmed, and it is so ordered.

BRATTON and BOTTS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

228 P. 888, 30 N.M. 160, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jennings-v-h-lutz-son-nm-1924.