Brown v. Durham

• Decision Date: 07 February 1905
• Citation: 110 Mo. App. 424,85 S.W. 120
• Parties: BROWN et al. v. DURHAM.<SMALL><SUP>*</SUP></SMALL>
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

85 S.W. 120

110 Mo. App. 424

BROWN et al. v. DURHAM.^*

St. Louis Court of Appeals. Missouri.

February 7, 1905.

ARBITRATION AND AWARD — ARBITRATORS — JURISDICTION — TERMINATION — REHEARING — INCONSISTENT AWARDS — MOTION TO CONFIRM — EVIDENCE.

1. Where arbitrators filed an award in favor of plaintiffs, and thereafter, on rehearing, filed a second award in favor of defendant, evidence was inadmissible to explain such action on the hearing of a motion to confirm.

2. Where an award was made, signed, and delivered by arbitrators, their authority was terminated, and they had no jurisdiction to reopen the case, and make a new award, without the consent of both parties.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Wayne County; Frank R. Dearing, Judge.

Action by R. A. Brown and another against S. R. Durham. From a judgment in favor of plaintiffs, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

J. F. Lindsay, for appellant. J. F. Green, for respondents.

BLAND, P. J.

There being matters of difference between E. W. Moore, R. A. Brown, and Alexander Dow, they, on March 31, 1903, entered into a written agreement to submit their differences to D. M. Clark, John Schiek, and A. J. Durham, as arbitrators. The arbitrators qualified, set a time and place for the hearing, gave notice thereof to the parties, and on the day appointed both parties appeared before the arbitrators, who, after hearing all the evidence, made the following award:

"We, the undersigned, arbitrators, having been duly selected to hear and determine all the issues and matters of dispute between R. A. Brown and E. W. Moore on one hand and Alexander Dow on the other, do hereby make report of our findings on said controversy. After taking the oath prescribed by law, viewing, the premises, hearing the testimony and listening to the argument of counsel, we, after due deliberation, do hereby make report of our finding. After a full and fair accounting of all the matters of dispute between the parties and after allowing all just credits and set-offs, we find that Alexander Dow is indebted to R. A. Brown and E. W. Moore in the sum of two hundred and twenty-seven dollars ($227) and we find the issues for them in that amount. We further find that the deed made by Alex. Dow and wife to R. A. Brown, dated October 29, 1898, was and is a warranty deed and that it was intended and accepted as such, and further find that there was no intention at any time to hold said deed to be a mortgage or anything but a bona fide deed. Witness our hands this fifth day of April, 1903. D. M. Clark, John Schiek, A. J. Durham. Attest: S. J. Hawkins."

The arbitrators delivered the award to S. J. Hawkins, attorney for Brown and Moore. After this award was made and signed, but on the same day, the attorney for Dow filed before the arbitrators the following motion: "In the matter of the arbitration between R. A. Brown and E. W. Moore on the one hand and Alex. Dow on the other. Now at this day comes Alex. Dow, by his attorney, and moves the arbitrators to reconsider their decision in this case, for the following reasons, to wit: Because there was evidence introduced contrary to the agreement of the parties to the controversy; because the certified copies of deeds should not have been permitted to have been introduced, as they were not competent nor...