Donovan v. Consol. Coal Co. of St. Louis
| Decision Date | 19 October 1900 |
| Citation | 187 Ill. 28,58 N.E. 290 |
| Parties | DONOVAN v. CONSOLIDATED COAL CO. OF ST. LOUIS. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from appellate court, Fourth district.
Action by the Consolidated Coal Company of St. Louis against Joseph T. Donovan and others to recover damages for trespasses on coal deposits. From a judgment of the appellate court (88 Ill. App. 589) affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant Donovan appeals. Affirmed.
Dill & Wilderman and Geo. C. Rebhan, for appellant.
Charles W. Thomas, for appellee.
Appellant owned a tract of 21 1/2 acres of land in St. Clair county, in which was a coal mine known as the ‘Johnson Mine.’ He also owned the surface of an adjoining tract on the west, containing 135 acres; but appellee owned the coal under said surface, which had been conveyed to it before appellant obtained his title to the surface. On October 1, 1896, appellant entered into a written contract with the St. Louis & O'Fallon Coal Company, Edward L. Thomas, and John T. Taylor, by which he leased to them, for the term of five years from said date, the Johnsonmine, with 1 acre of ground around the shaft, and the machinery and appurtenances, and also granted to them the right to mine and remove the coal underlying said lands, including the coal of appellee, to which he did not have or claim any title; and they agreed to pay him a certain price per ton for all the coal so mined. Under this contract the St. Louis & O'Fallon Coal Company went into possession of the mine, and on November 30, 1896, sublet said mine to Thomas Davis and others, with the right to mine and remove said coal during said term, for which coal the St. Louis & O'Fallon Coal Company was to pay certain prices per ton, stipulated in the contract. Under these arrangements, and by virtue of the right which appellant assumed to grant, over 5,000 tons of coal owned by appellee under the 135 acres were mined and removed. Appellant was paid the price specified in his contract per ton for said coal. Appellee brought this action of trespass in the circuit court of St. Clair county against appellant and the parties who mined and removed the coal, to recover damages occasioned by such mining and removal of its coal. The defendants pleaded the general issue, and, a jury being waived, there was a trial by the court. There was a nonsuit as to all the defendants except the appellant, and there was a finding and judgment against him for $2,500 and costs. On appeal to the appellate court the judgment was affirmed.
The court held as law a proposition submitted by the plaintiff,-that if the plaintiff was the owner of the coal, and the defendant Donovan made the contract authorizing and empowering the St. Louis & O'Fallon Coal Company, Edward L. Thomas, and John T. Taylor to enter upon said coal and dig and carry the same away in consideration of the price per ton to be paid said defendant, and said lessees made some arrangements with other parties under which they dug the coal, and defendant received said price per ton, he was guilty of the trespass. The court refused to hold that, if the defendant Donovan did not participate in mining the coal otherwise than by making the contract under which it was dug and mined, then he was not liable for the trespasses. The action of the court on these propositions is assigned as error, on the ground that the contract of the defendant Donovan did not create any such relation between him and the other parties, or give him any such control over them, as to make him liable for their trespasses. There are cases where a liability may arise out of the relation of the parties, as a master may become liable for the act of a servant, or a principal for that of his agent, although not authorized by him. But questions of that kind are immaterial in this case. It was not sought to hold Donovan liable for some act not authorized by him, but the trespass for which the suit was brought was the identical thing authorized by him. He undertook, without the consent of the plaintiff, to dispose of its coal, and the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Trustees of Dartmouth College v. International Paper Co.
... ... the recovery of (a) stumpage, or, in the case of coal, of ... reasonable royalty ( Hilton v. Woods, L.R. 4 Eq. 432; ... All the language ... of the courts cannot be reconciled (see Donovan v ... Consol. Coal Co., 187 Ill. 28, 58 N.E. 290, 79 ... Am.St.Rep ... ...
-
NEUROSURGERY AND SPINE SURGERY v. Goldman
...P. 234 (1911)), conversion (see Holland v. Bishop, 60 Minn. 23, 61 N.W. 681 (1895)), or trespass to land (see Donovan v. Consolidated Coal Co., 187 Ill. 28, 58 N.E. 290 (1900)). A misrepresentation is the essence of torts such as defamation, interference with contractual relations, and mali......
-
Lyons v. Central Coal & Coke Company
...Mont. 100; Empire, etc. Co. v. Bonanza, etc. Co., 67 Cal. 406; Goller v. Fett, 30 Cal. 481; Maye v. Yappen, 23 Cal. 306; Donovan v. St. Louis, etc. Co., 187 Ill. 28; Coal Co. v. Ogle, 82 Ill. 627; Herdie v. Young, 55 Pa. St. 176; Waters v. Stevenson, 13 Nev. 157; Coal Co. v. Cox, 39 Md. 1. ......
-
Dethloff v. Zeigler Coal Co.
...addition to the costs of transporting it to the mouth of the pit. This rule had earlier been applied in Donovan v. Consolidated Coal Co. of St. Louis (1900), 187 Ill. 28, 58 N.E. 290. It can readily be seen that we can value the coal at any point in the marketing chain, so long as we give c......