Browning v. North Missouri Cent. Ry. Co.
| Decision Date | 03 July 1916 |
| Docket Number | No. 17264.,17264. |
| Citation | Browning v. North Missouri Cent. Ry. Co., 188 S.W. 143 (Mo. 1916) |
| Parties | BROWNING v. NORTH MISSOURI CENT. RY. CO. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court; Hugo Muench, Judge.
Action by E. T. Browning against the North Missouri Central Railway Company.From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.Reversed and remanded.
This suit was instituted on September 28, 1910.The petition is in two counts; the first being for damages for breach of contract concerning the furnishing of material to build defendant's contemplated railroad; the second is on an account.Plaintiff recovered on the first count $29,190.42 and interest, on the second count $1,284.71 and interest, in all $32,774.40.Defendant has appealed.
No question arises on the sufficiency or effect of the pleadings.A jury was waived, and the trial was to the court.
About December 30, 1908, defendant was incorporated for the purpose of building a railroad from Mexico, Mo., via Columbia, Ashland, and Cedar City to Jefferson City.Its incorporators were all residents of Boone county, Mo., except one who owned one share of stock and lived in New York.Its by-laws provided as follows:
"No debt shall be contracted nor liabilities incurred nor contract made by or on behalf of this company in excess of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) unless the same be authorized or directed by the by-laws or by the duly recorded vote of the board of directors at a regular meeting or a special meeting called for the purpose."
Those by-laws also provided that its treasurer should —
"have the custody of and be responsible for all the moneys and securities of the company," and should "indorse for collection or deposit all bills, notes, checks and other negotiable instruments of the company."
Plaintiff was a resident of Kansas City and was doing business on his sole account under the name E. T. Browning & Co.About December 1, 1909, a contract in writing, purporting to be between E. T. Browning & Co. of the first part and the defendant of the second part, was signed in duplicate by plaintiff and by O. F. Spaete, defendant's president, as follows:
Those duplicate originals were delivered one each to plaintiff and Spaete.At the time of the execution of said contract the plaintiff delivered his draft to said Spaete for $500, payable to defendant's order.It was read in evidence with the only indorsement thereon, "North Missouri Central Railway Co., O. F. Spaete, President."Plaintiff testified that the $500 was put up as a guaranty of his good faith and ability to perform the contract.The contract made no mention of such guaranty.There is no evidence that Spaete ever accounted for that sum to defendant.The defendant objected to the evidence as to that item for the reason that Spaete as president had no authority to receive that money on behalf of defendant.The objection was overruled.The material parts of that contract are as follows:
Defendant objected to said instrument on the ground that Spaete did not have authority to execute the same, and that it had not been approved by defendant's board of directors.The objection was overruled.
On February 12, 1910, V. H. Roberts, general counsel of defendant, sent to the plaintiff by mail the following document:
Plaintiff testified that the signature of Spaete to that document was in Spaete's handwriting.There was no evidence to the contrary.The evidence shows that no such entry as there called for was ever made in the record of proceedings of the board of directors, and that M. B. Johnson was never such assistant secretary.There is no evidence to show what, if any, knowledge plaintiff had that such document was false.
About January 22, 1910, by correspondence in writing between plaintiff and W. Stuart Tait, defendant's chief engineer, it was agreed that 2,500 7-inch 40-feet Idaho cedar poles at $7.35 each and 500 6-inch 30-foot Northern cedar poles at $2.30 each should be substituted for the poles named in the original contract.About April 19, 1910, by correspondence in writing between plaintiff and H. A. Albin, defendant's general manager, it was agreed that black walnut cross-ties would be accepted under said contract the same as other ties; that plaintiff should have the option to deliver 9,000 No. 2 cross-ties as a part of the whole number to be delivered, at 10 cents less per tie than for No. 1 ties, also that No. 1 ties...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Davis v. Holloway
...for respondent on the issues made by appellant's counterclaim. Choteau v. Russell, 4 Mo. 553; Cress v. Blodgett, 64 Mo. 449; Browning v. Ry. Co., 188 S.W. 143; Cornett v. Best, 151 Mo.App. 551; Curtis Sexton, 142 Mo.App. 190. (5) The alleged contract relied upon by appellants was an oral co......
-
Johnson v. Kruckemeyer
... ... [ * ] Court of Appeals of Missouri, St. Louis June 24, 1930 ... Appeal ... from the ... others. Browning v. Railroad (Mo. Sup.), 188 S.W ... 143; Waiver, 27 R. C. L., p. 906, ... compensation shall be payable on the basis of 66 2/3 per cent ... of the average earnings of the employee, computed in ... accordance ... ...
-
Hiatt Inv. Co. v. Buehler
... ... E. A. BUEHLER, RESPONDENT Court of Appeals of Missouri, Kansas City March 4, 1929 ... Appeal ... from ... and the latter being situated further to the north gave the ... store room some of the advantages of a corner location ... defendant's store would be thirty-five per cent. In this ... connection plaintiff caused the court to give its ... [13 C. J. 653, 657, 658; Browning ... ...
-
McHale v. Goshen Ditch Co.
...v. Lumber Co., 152 La. 399, 93 So. 199; Risinger v. Cheney, 7 Ill. 84; McCormick v. Tappendorf, 51 Wash. 312, 99 P. 2. In Browning v. Ry. Co., (Mo.) 188 S.W. 143, the said: "The undertakings of parties to a contract are mutual and dependent, and before either can recover for breach, he must......