Assumpsit, for labor and materials. Facts found by the court» The plaintiff, a painter, furnished to the defendant, at his request, labor and materials in painting and decorating a bar and the room containing it. The plaintiff knew that it was the purpose of the defendant to use the room and bar in illegally selling intoxicating liquors; and after their completion they were' so used. The plaintiff took no part in their illegal use.
Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently January 1931
¶1
The plaintiff is not precluded from a recovery of the value of his labor and materials upon the bar and, the room containing it by his knowledge that the defendant intended to use them for an unlawful purpose. The case is not distinguishable in principle from
Delavina
v.
Hill,
65 N. H. 94. See, in addition,
Tracy
v.
Talmage,
14 N. H. 162,— 67 Am. Dec. 132, and note;
Tyler
v.
Carlisle,
79 Me. 210,— 1 Am. St. Rep. 301, and note;
Michael
v.
Bacon,
49 Mo. 474,— 8 Am. Rep. 138, and note;
Webber
v.
Donnelly,
33 Mich. 469;
Hubbard
v.
Moore,
24 La. An., 591, — 13 Am. Rep. 128;
Mahood
v.
Tealza,
26 La. An. 108,— 21 Am. Rep. 546.
