
    Marie Hansen and Herman Busch, trading as Hansen Busch Auto Company, Plaintiffs in Error, v. Albert G. Ferree, Defendant in Error.
    Gen. No. 20,410.
    (Not to be reported in full.)
    Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Harry M. Fisher, Judge, presiding.
    Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1914.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed October 5, 1915.
    Statement of the Case.
    Suit by Marie Hansen and Herman Busch, copartners, trading as Hansen Busch Auto Company, against Albert G. Ferree, based upon a verbal contract to recover for labor and material furnished in erecting and equipping an automobile.
    All of the items of labor and material set forth in plaintiffs’ affidavit of claim were disputed by the defendant. The principal contention, however, related to the number of hours of labor expended on said car. There was a trial by jury, who found the issues against thq plaintiffs and judgment was entered thereon, whereupon the plaintiffs sued out this writ of error.
    B. M. Shaffner, for plaintiffs in error.
    George L. Turnbull, for defendant in error.
    
      Abstract of the Decision.
    1. Assumpsit, action of, § 88
      
      —what evidence is proper to show amount of labor furnished. In a suit to recover for labor and material furnished in erecting and equipping an automobile, time cards showing the hours of work spent by servants on each automobile, which were properly identified, were erroneously rejected as evidence.
    2. Appeal and error, § 1253
      
      —when error in the exclusion of evidence ccmnot be complained of. In an action to recover for labor and material furnished in erecting and equipping an automobile, error in the exclusion of time cards tending to show the amount of labor furnished cannot be complained of by the plaintiff where the record shows a recovery in excess of the amount which could have been recovered if such time cards had been admitted in evidence.
    3. Appeal and error, § 1410
      
      —when verdict not disturbed. A verdict not manifestly against the weight of evidence will not be disturbed on appeal.
    
      
      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.
    
   Mr. Justice McGoorty

delivered the opinion of the court.  