Ewell v. Central City

• Decision Date: 23 November 1960
• Citation: 340 S.W.2d 479
• Parties: M. Watkins EWELL et al., Appellants, v. CENTRAL CITY et al., Appellees.
• Court: United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky

Page 479

340 S.W.2d 479

M. Watkins EWELL et al., Appellants, v. CENTRAL CITY et al., Appellees.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Nov. 23, 1960.

Lake, Bratcher & Cook, Carmol D. Cook, Hartford, for appellants.

W. D. Bratcher, Greenville, for appellees.

MOREMEN, Judge.

This is an appeal from a judgment which sustained appellees' motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground that it did not state a cause of action.

The complaint, as amended, identified the parties defendant and then alleged in another paragraph:

'That at a called meeting of the Board of Council for the city of Central City, Kentucky, held on January 17, 1956, for the purpose of selecting an attorney at law to represent the city of Central City in legal matters necessary to construct, own and operate a gas distribution system for the purpose of supplying natural gas to the citizens of Central City, Kentucky, a contract was made and entered into by and between the defendant, city of Central City and the plaintiff, M. Watkins Ewell, whereby the said M. Watkins Ewell with the assistance of the city attorney of Central City would provide the legal services in connection with the proposed natural gas distribution system in the city of Central City for an agreed fee of $4,000, plus expenses of said attorneys. A copy of said contract is filed herewith and made a part hereof and marked Exhibit 'A' for identification, the original contract, together with the minutes of the Board of Council in adopting and approving the contract are the permanent records of the defendant, city of Central City, in the official Minute Book of the Board of Council, and plaintiff cannot file herewith the originals thereof. Subsequent to January 17, 1956, at a meeting of the Board of Council of the city of Central City, a resolution was introduced, adopted and approved whereby the city of Central City gas distribution system would be extended to include the city of Calhoun, Kentucky, and other environs along the proposed natural gas transmission additional legal services to be performed by the attorneys and that said attorneys should have $2,000 additional compensation for services rendered.'

The contract, which was filed with the petition, supported those allegations.

It is further alleged that while appellants were actively engaged in the performance of their duties, the Board of Council of the city of Central City, by resolution, abandoned all plans for a municipally owned natural gas system and offered to...