Allen v. Tacoma Mill Co.

• Decision Date: 07 December 1897
• Citation: 18 Wash. 216,51 P. 372
• Parties: ALLEN v. TACOMA MILL CO.
• Court: Washington Supreme Court

51 P. 372

18 Wash. 216

ALLEN v. TACOMA MILL CO.

Supreme Court of Washington

December 7, 1897

Appeal from superior court, Pierce county; Thomas Carroll, Judge.

Action by J. H. Allen against the Tacoma Mill Company. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Crowley & Grosscup, for appellant.

Allen &amp Allen, for respondent.

GORDON J.

This was an action brought to recover the value of certain saw logs and boom sticks, the property of plaintiff's assignor, which the complaint alleges the appellant (defendant below) converted to its own use. In addition to denying the allegations of the complaint, the answer affirmatively alleged that the plaintiff's assignor sold defendant a raft of logs containing 227,128 feet, for the sum of $988, and that the same included the logs described in the complaint; that a settlement was had between the parties in relation to said logs, including the logs in the complaint described; and that upon such settlement the sum of $988 was found due plaintiff's assignor, which sum was paid in full settlement of all claims and demands for and on account of said logs. The case proceeded to trial, and verdict and judgment were rendered in plaintiff's favor, from which defendant has appealed.

On the trial, defendant introduced in evidence the following exhibit: "Tacoma, November 25th, 1895. Received from Tacoma Mill Company nine hundred and eighty-eight dollars being in full settlement of all claims and demands for all logs contained in raft received and scaled by said company Nov. 19th; and we hereby accept the scale of the Tacoma Mill Company on said logs, which is 227,128 feet. Hood's Canal Lumber Company by A. J. Pres." The evidence being all in, counsel for appellant requested the court to give the following instruction: "Upon the evidence in this case your verdict must be for the defendant, and you are directed to find such verdict." The refusal to give such instruction is assigned as error. The following instruction was also requested by appellant: "The instrument in writing introduced in evidence, signed by the Hood's Canal Lumber Company, by A. J. Baker, president, is a release and settlement for all the logs in the raft therein mentioned; and, in the absence of fraud, it must be considered by the jury as a release of all claim on the part of the said Hood's Canal Lumber Company and the plaintiff." The court also refused to give this instruction, and...