Opinion
Rehearing Denied Jan. 19, 1971.
Page 432
Herbert A. Shatz, Denver, for plaintiffs in error.
Harry H. Haddock, Denver, for defendants in error.
PIERCE, Judge.
This case was originally filed in the Supreme Court of the State of Colorado and was subsequently transferred to the Court of Appeals under authority vested in the Supreme Court.
The only parties involved in this appeal are James Laird and James Welgos, defendant and plaintiff, respectively, in the court below. The matter on appeal is the trial court's judgment against Laird in an action in which Laird was found liable to Welgos, in connection with certain photographic services rendered.
We find in the record sufficient evidence, though controverted, which supports a conclusion that Laird promised to pay Welgos for the photographic services rendered, after such services had been rendered in part. This finding is binding upon this Court. Whatley v. Wood, 157 Colo. 552, 404 P.2d 537.
While evidence indicating for whom these services were initially undertaken was in dispute at trial (Welgos claimed that they were undertaken for Laird, while Laird disclaimed any responsibility for them), evidence in the record supports the conclusion of the trial court that such services were of direct benefit to Laird, individually. Therefore, Laird's promise to pay was 'original,' and not 'collateral,' and was thus removed from the Colorado Statute of Frauds (C.R.S.1963, 59--1--12). Laird's promise was, accordingly, enforceable. Cramblit v. Chateau Motel, Inc., Colo.App., 472 P.2d 183.
Judgment is affirmed.
DWYER and DUFFORD, JJ., concur.