Arkansas Val. Town & Land Co. v. Lincoln

Decision Date07 December 1895
Docket Number7740
PartiesTHE ARKANSAS VALLEY TOWN AND LAND COMPANY v. H. S. LINCOLN
CourtKansas Supreme Court

Error from Chase District Court.

THE plaintiff in error (defendant below) was chartered as a corporation June 29, 1885, its purposes being the purchase and sale of real estate for the benefit of its members, the purchase, location and laying out of town sites, and the sale and conveyance of the same in lots and subdivisions or otherwise, and the erection of buildings and other improvements thereon, and such acts as might be deemed necessary and desirable to the proper and advantageous management of its business, the places thereof being at Topeka, Kan., Boston, Mass., and such other places in the states and territories of the United States as might, from time to time, be deemed desirable along or near the line of the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe railroad, or its leased operated, connecting or auxiliary lines. This corporation was on intimate relations with the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railroad Company, some of its officers being also officers of the railroad company, and its general office was in the building of the latter company, at Topeka. Prior to April 1886, an auxiliary road had been projected, known as the Emporia & El Dorado short line, extending from a point on the main line, in Chase county, southerly to a point called Richards, where a town site was located within a mile of Matfield Green, a small town in said county. The defendant in error (plaintiff below) resided at the latter place, and had a general store and some other property there. In April 1886, W. G. Dickinson, the general agent of the town and land company, called upon Lincoln at Matfield Green, and entered into negotiations to induce him to remove his store and place of residence to Richards, which was then nothing more than a paper town site, consisting of farming lands. In June following, at request of Dickinson, Lincoln visited the latter at his office in Topeka, and it was orally agreed that Lincoln would remove his store building and stock to Richards, the town company to pay $ 250 toward the expense thereof; that Lincoln should be the local agent of the town company at Richards for the sale and donation of lots, and to induce settlement upon the town site especially by the residents of Matfield Green, and that 11 lots for business and residence purposes should be conveyed to Lincoln, the town company agreeing that the railroad should be built equipped, completed and in operation to Richards by September 1, 1886. At this interview and before, Dickinson was fully informed of the extent and character of the business transacted by Lincoln at Matfield Green. Thereafter, on June 28, 1886, Lincoln wrote a letter to Dickinson, in order that they might understand each other, in which he stated what each proposed to do; but he omitted all mention of the railroad. On June 30, Dickinson answered Lincoln's letter, urging him to move at the earliest practicable moment, and push things as rapidly as possible, and that he could rest assured that the railroad would be built and in operation as stated in the conversation at Topeka, and that he would deed the lots as soon as Lincoln was on the ground; and on July 2, 1886, Dickinson sent to Lincoln an appointment as local agent at Richards. There was considerable correspondence between Lincoln and Dickinson until the latter was succeeded in office by R. M. Spivey, about August 1, 1886, when the same was renewed between Lincoln and Spivey. About July 17 to 19, 1886, Lincoln had a conversation with Dickinson, in which he told the latter he could not go on with the matter unless he had positive assurance that the railroad would be built to Richards that fall, and thereupon Dickinson said they would guarantee that the railroad would be built to Richards that fall, and for him to go ahead. Lincoln did not get his store removed and completed until early in September, but he did what he could to induce people in and about Matfield Green to establish themselves at Richards, with only a small degree of success. His stock was of about $ 12,000 in value. For the last two or three years of the business at Matfield Green, Lincoln had sold about $ 30,000 worth of goods annually, at a profit of 10 per cent. His store was at Richards about a year, when all hope of the early completion of the railroad to that point was abandoned, and he gave up the enterprise, having sold about $ 5,000 worth of goods during the year, but without any profit. The cost of removal of the building and stock was about $ 500, and the building was depreciated in value to the extent of $ 500 to $ 1,500. The town company deeded the lots to Lincoln, and also paid $ 250 on the cost of removal, as agreed upon. The railroad was never completed to Richards, but stopped at Bazaar, about eight miles north of Richards.

The original action was commenced by Lincoln to recover damages in the sum of $ 8,700 on account of the breach of the agreement of the town company for the completion of the railroad to Richards. A trial before the court and a jury at November term, 1890, resulted in a judgment in favor of Lincoln for $ 3,791.66 damages and $ 134.74 costs. The defendant company brings the case to this court.

Judgment affirmed.

A. A. Hurd, W. Littlefield, and O. J. Wood, for plaintiff in error.

Madden Bros., and Waters & Waters, for defendant in error.

MARTIN C. J. All the Justices concurring.

OPINION

MARTIN, C. J.:

I. The first question concerns the validity of the contract of guaranty that the railroad would be completed to Richards and this includes the power of the town company to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 cases
  • Power County v. Evans Brothers Land & Live Stock Co.
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court
    • 19 Octubre 1926
    ... ... after receiving the benefit of the contract. (Arkansas ... v. Lincoln, 56 Kan. 145, 42 P. 706; Western & ... Southern Fire Ins ... ...
  • Indemnity Co. v. Shovel Co.
    • United States
    • Ohio Supreme Court
    • 24 Febrero 1925
    ... ... Arkansas. The record shows that at the time these bonds were ... transaction as a defense. Arkansas Valley Town & Land Co. v ... Lincoln, 56 Kan. 145, 42 P. 706; Western ... ...
  • State ex rel. Parker v. Kansas City
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • 27 Enero 1940
    ... ... land donated in pre-statehood times to the town of Wyandotte, ... Land & ... Invest Co., 47 Kan. 621, 28 P. 720; Arkansas Val ... Town & Land Co. v. Lincoln, 56 Kan. 145, 42 P ... ...
  • Ft. Smith & W. R. Co. v. Williams
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • 6 Enero 1912
    ...being ascertained with reasonable certainty"--citing Hoge v. Norton, 22 Kan. 374; Brown v. Hadley, 43 Kan. 267, 23 P. 492; Town Co. v. Lincoln, 56 Kan. 145, 42 P. 706. ¶6 In the case of Williams v. Island City Mercantile Company, 25 Ore. 573, 37 P. 49, cited by plaintiff in error, Mr. Justi......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT