Felton v. West Iron Mountain Min. Co.
| Decision Date | 22 April 1895 |
| Citation | 40 P. 70,16 Mont. 81 |
| Parties | FELTON v. WEST IRON MOUNTAIN MIN. CO. |
| Court | Montana Supreme Court |
Appeal from district court, Missoula county; C. M. Crutchfield Judge.
Action by Charles Felton against the West Iron Mountain Mining Company. There was a judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.
M. L Crouch and H. D. Moore, for appellant.
This is an action brought by the plaintiff to recover for labor and services performed as superintendent of the defendant's mines, and for money expended and goods furnished for its use and benefit. The answer denies all the allegations contained in the complaint, as to the indebtedness sued for, and pleads a counterclaim against the plaintiff. The replication denies the counterclaim. The case was tried with a jury. The jury made special findings, and rendered a general verdict for the plaintiff. Judgment was rendered for the plaintiff. From the judgment, and an order overruling a motion for new trial this appeal is prosecuted. The theory of the defense is that the plaintiff was a trustee of the defendant, a corporation and a large stockholder therein; that he had never been appointed superintendent by the board of trustees, and his compensation fixed, as required by the by-laws of said corporation; that he was trustee and secretary of the company, and was employed by the day at $3.50 per day for what time he actually worked in the mines, and that the service he seeks compensation for in this action. as superintendent, was rendered by him as trustee, without any contract for pay therefor, either express or implied; that he had been paid all the company owed him on any account whatever. The defendant sets up a counterclaim against the plaintiff for stock of the company which it alleges plaintiff sold, and failed to account for the money obtained thereby. There were three questions of fact submitted to the jury: First. Did the plaintiff perform the service, expend the money, and furnish the goods, as alleged in the complaint, for the use and benefit of the defendant? Second. Did the plaintiff perform such service outside of his duties as trustee, secretary, and stockholder, and under such circumstances as to clearly raise the presumption that he and the trustees understood that he was to be paid therefor? Third. Was the defendant's counterclaim established by the evidence? These questions of fact were all submitted to the jury, under fair instructions, we think. It is true there was a conflict of evidence upon all these issues. But it was the province of the jury to settle this conflict. They determined the questions in favor of the plaintiff. We think there was...
To continue reading
Request your trial