Pardey v. American Ship Windlass Co.

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Pardey v. American Ship Windlass Co.

36 A. 1132, 19 R.I. 461

CourtSupreme Court of Rhode Island

DecidedApril 29, 1896

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 36 A. 1132 (Pardey v. American Ship Windlass Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Pardey v. American Ship Windlass Co., 36 A. 1132, 19 R.I. 461 (R.I. 1896).

Pincite

Opinion

Matteson, C. J.

We are of the opinion that the action cannot be maintained.. By the terms of the agreement, the one dollar per week from the wages of the plaintiff’s, son, Prank Brown Pardey, retained by the defendant, was not payable until the expiration of three years, during which he was to remain in the defendant’s employment. This term did not expire until April IT, 1896, and the suit was brought February 8, 1896, and consequently before the money was payable in any event.

But apart from this consideration, the plaintiff is not entitled to the money. The agreement provides for its payment, not to the plaintiff but to his son. By confirming and approving the agreement between the son and the defendant the plaintiff in effect emancipated his son, so far as the wages earned under the contract were concerned, and gave the wages to. his son. They became, therefore, the property of the son, and not the property of the plaintiff.

Case remitted to the District Court of the Sixth Judicial District, with direction to enter judgment for the defendant for costs.

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

Matteson, C. J.

We are of the opinion that the action cannot be maintained.. By the terms of the agreement, the one dollar per week from the wages of the plaintiff’s, son, Prank Brown Pardey, retained by the defendant, was not payable until the expiration of three years, during which he was to remain in the defendant’s employment. This term did not expire until April IT, 1896, and the suit was brought February 8, 1896, and consequently before the money was payable in any event.

But apart from this consideration, the plaintiff is not entitled to the money. The agreement provides for its payment, not to the plaintiff but to his son. By confirming and approving the agreement between the son and the defendant the plaintiff in effect emancipated his son, so far as the wages earned under the contract were concerned, and gave the wages to. his son. They became, therefore, the property of the son, and not the property of the plaintiff.

Case remitted to the District Court of the Sixth Judicial District, with direction to enter judgment for the defendant for costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

36 A. 1132, 19 R.I. 461, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pardey-v-american-ship-windlass-co-ri-1896.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack