Carey v. Bilby
Decision Date | 07 March 1904 |
Docket Number | 1,929,1,930. |
Citation | 129 F. 203 |
Parties | CAREY v. BILBY et al. (two cases). |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
John S Bilby and Russell I. Bilby, the defendants in error in case No. 1,929, brought an action against John L. Carey, the plaintiff in error, to recover certain damages for injuries which they claimed to have sustained in consequence of their being induced by the defendant, Carey, to purchase from him certain Texas cattle through false representations. John S Bilby and John E. Bilby, the defendants in error in case No 1,930, brought a similar action against John L. Carey plaintiff in error. The complaints in the two cases were substantially alike, except that in case No. 1,929 the damages claimed by plaintiffs below were $13,611, whereas the damages claimed in case No. 1,930 was the sum of $3,809. The complaints stated, in substance, that in the month of May, 1897, the defendant, Carey, and one C. J. Hysham were the owners of 755 head of cattle, which had been shipped by them from the state of Texas to the city of St. Joseph, Mo.; that said Carey and Hysham offered to sell to the plaintiffs below certain of said cattle, and, to induce them to buy, represented that the cattle had been kept during all of the preceding winter and spring in a part of the state of Texas, which was entirely free from, and not infected with, a certain contagious disease commonly known as 'Spanish Fever,' and that they had not been driven over or in the vicinity of any territory in the state of Texas which was infected by said disease, and had not been exposed thereto, but were in a sound and healthy condition; that, relying on this representation, and believing the same to be true, they purchased a certain number of the cattle from Carey and Hysham, and paid them therefor; that the representations aforesaid, at the time they were made, were known to the vendors of the cattle to be untrue; that they also knew that the purchasers of the cattle would pasture them on lands in the state of Missouri with a large number of Missouri and other native-born northern cattle; that they were so pastured by the vendees, after they were purchased, with other northern-bred cattle; that, in consequence of their being affected with the contagious disease aforesaid, they communicated the disease to other cattle with whom they were herded, which belonged to the plaintiffs below, and that in consequence thereof the plaintiffs lost a large number of cattle of great value, and that they were damaged in the one case to the amount of $15,840 and in the other case to the extent of $4,580, in consequence of the disease in question being communicated to their respective herds. The plaintiffs below further alleged that they had been paid by C. J. Hysham, on account of the damages claimed in case No. 1,929, the sum of $2,229, and that they had been paid by C. J. Hysham, on account of the damages claimed in case No. 1,930, the sum of $771, leaving a balance of damages due to them in the one case in the sum of $13,611 and a balance due to them in the other case in the sum of $3,809.
Among other allegations contained in the defendant's answer it was admitted that the plaintiffs had received from C. J. Hysham the sums of money alleged in the complaints, and it was alleged that the sums so paid to the plaintiffs by Hysham were received and accepted by said plaintiffs in full release, satisfaction, and discharge of the pretended causes of action sued upon in said actions, and in full release of said Hysham from all liability thereon. On the trial of the cases the receipt which was signed by the plaintiffs when the sums of money were paid to them by C. J. Hysham was introduced in evidence, and was of the following purport:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Natrona Power Company v. Clark
...v. Sherwood (Ore.) 145 P. 645; the overruling of the demurrer is sustained by the following authorities, O'Shea v. Co. supra; Carey v. Bilby, 129 F. 203; Berry Pullman Co. 249 F. 816; Barnet v. Conklin, 268 F. 177; Co. v. Barnes, (Ky.) 111 Am. S. Rep. 273; Lovejoy v. Murray, 3 Wall 1-19; Fi......
-
McKenna v. Austin
...R. Co. v. Hunt, 1936, 193 Ark. 175, 98 S.W.2d 74; McKay v. Pacific Bldg. Materials Co., 1937, 156 Or. 578, 68 P. 2d 127. 4 Carey v. Bilby, 8 Cir., 1904, 129 F. 203; The Adour, D.C.D.Md.1927, 21 F.2d 858, 861; Colby v. Walker, 1934, 86 N.H. 568, 171 A. 774, 104 A.L.R. 841; Black v. Martin, 1......
-
Price v. Baker
...or defendants has been followed with substantial consistency in the United States since the turn of the century. Thus in Carey v. Bilby, 8 Cir., 1904, 129 F. 203, 206 the Court per Thayer, J., '* * * Other courts hold, however, that such an instrument should be given effect according to the......
-
Gamble v. Brown
...Lumber Co. v. Bargar (C. C. A.) 10 F.(2d) 335; Berry v. Pullman Co. (C. C. A.) 249 F. 816, L. R. A. 1918F, 358; Carey v. Bilby (C. C. A.) 129 F. 203; 50 A. L. R. 1081. Each director is liable in his personal and individual capacity, and may be sued alone or jointly with other directors, whe......