GR L 2345; (January, 1906) (Digest)
FACTS:
Plaintiff-appellee Robert M. Loper filed an action to recover payment for professional architectural and supervisory services rendered to defendant-appellant The Standard Oil Company. The complaint alleged an express promise to pay a specific sum but did not contain any allegation regarding the reasonable value of the services. During trial, however, evidence on the reasonable value of the services was presented by the plaintiff and received by the court without any objection from the defendant. The lower court rendered judgment in favor of the plaintiff based on this evidence.
ISSUE:
Whether the trial court erred in basing its judgment on evidence pertaining to the reasonable value of the services, which was not alleged in the complaint.
RULING:
No. The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the lower court. The defendant, having failed to object to the presentation of evidence on the reasonable value of the services during trial, is deemed to have waived any objection based on a variance between the allegations in the complaint and the evidence presented. Under procedural rules, defects in pleadings may be cured by amendment, and a party who proceeds to trial on the merits without raising an objection to the evidence cannot later assign it as error on appeal. This rule applies even when the evidence is elicited through questions from the court, as it remains the duty of the opposing party to interpose a timely objection.