McKeenan v. Thissel

33 Me. 368
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine·Decided July 1, 1851·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

A contractor agreed to do a prescribed -work for L, and employed laborers to ■work upon it at his own credit. That the work might not stop, L, with the consent of the contractor, promised the laborers, that, if they would continue to labor, he would pay their wages for the past as well as for the future; provided the funds in his hands, belonging to the contractor should be suf-, ficient. Held, the promise was not within the statute of frauds, or without legal consideration.

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

McKeenan v. Thissel, 33 Me. 368 (Me. 1851).

33 Me. 368 (McKeenan v. Thissel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hacker v. Whitney Dam Lumber & Construction Co.
225 S.W.2d 225 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1949)
Moon v. Greenlee
195 P. 1100 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1921)