Groshoff v. St. Gertrude's Convent

Decision Date22 July 1927
Docket Number4871
Citation44 Idaho 554,258 P. 528
PartiesKATHERINE GROSHOFF, as Executrix of the Estate of GEORGE GROSHOFF, Deceased, Appellant, v. ST. GERTRUDE'S CONVENT, a Corporation, Respondent
CourtIdaho Supreme Court

MASTER AND SERVANT-INABILITY TO PERFORM CONTRACT, EFFECT-EMPLOYER AND EMPLOYEE-EXPRESS OR IMPLIED CONTRACT MUST BE SHOWN-FAILURE TO PLEAD ASSUMPTION OF LIABILITY, EFFECT.

1. Inability of master to perform his contracts such as would arise from closing out or change of business terminates such contract.

2. Where recovery for damages for breach of contract is sought from successor of original employer, it is necessary, in order to state a cause of action arising out of relation of employer and employee, that contract, express or implied, is shown with successor.

3. Truth of allegation amounting only to a legal conclusion was not admitted by demurrer to complaint.

4. Where, in action for damages for breach of contract against successor of original employer, complaint alleged no facts as to assumption of liability by successor, there was no cause of action alleged.

APPEAL from the District Court of the Tenth Judicial District, for Idaho County. Hon. Miles S. Johnson, Judge.

Action for damages for breach of contract. Judgment for respondent. Affirmed.

Judgment sustained. Costs awarded to respondent.

J. H Forney, for Appellant, cites no authorities on points decided.

Luby &amp Pearson, Frank L. Moore and Latham D. Moore, for Respondent.

Facts not well pleaded and conclusions of law are not admitted by demurrer. (Burkhart v. Reed, 2 Idaho (Hasb.), 503 (506), 22 P. 1; 134 U.S. 361, 10 S.Ct. 573, 33 L.Ed. 945; Caldwell v. Village of Mountain Home, 29 Idaho 13, 156 P. 909.)

Plaintiff must allege all the ultimate facts necessary to entitle her to recover. (Hyatt v. Humbird Lumber Co., 31 Idaho 457, 173 P. 1085; Inman v. Round Valley Irr. Co., 41 Idaho 482, 238 P. 1018.)

The complaint is insufficient to charge defendant with any liability to plaintiff's testator. (Colorado Springs Rapid Transit Co. v. Albrecht, 22 Colo. App. 201, 123 P. 957; Baker Furniture Co. v. Hall, 76 Neb. 88, 111 N.W. 129.)

The relation of employer and employee arises only out of contract, expressed or implied. (Ramon v. Interstate Utilities Co., 31 Idaho 117, 170 P. 88; Parker v. Wilson, 179 Ala. 361, 60 So. 150, 43 L. R. A., N. S., 87; Chicago & E. I. R. Co. v. Argo, 82 Ill.App. 667; People v. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co., 306 Ill. 486, 28 A. L. R. 610, 138 N.E. 155; McDowell v. Duer, 78 Ind.App. 440, 133 N.E. 839; Nisson v. Miller, 72 Ind.App. 261, 125 N.E. 652; Rogers v. Rogers, 70 Ind.App. 659, 122 N.E. 778; Birmingham Trust & Savings Co. v. Atlanta, B. & A. Ry. Co., 271 F. 743; C. C. Slaughter Cattle Co. v. Pastrana (Tex. Civ. App.), 217 S.W. 749.)

In order that a promise may be implied on the part of a corporation to pay the debts of another corporation to the property of which it has succeeded the conduct relied upon must show such intention. (Colorado Springs Rapid Transit v. Albrecht, 22 Colo. App. 201, 123 P. 957; Baker Furniture Co. v. Hall, 76 Neb. 88, 111 N.W. 129.)

GIVENS, J. Wm. E. Lee, C. J., and Budge and T. Bailey Lee, JJ., concur.

OPINION

GIVENS, J.

Appellant, as executrix of the estate of George Groshoff, deceased, sued St. Gertrude's Convent, a corporation, respondent, to recover compensation for alleged constructive services. It was alleged in effect that the Ven. Sisters, O. S. B., hired deceased to superintend the erection of certain buildings at an agreed price; that respondent took over and became the owner of the property and succeeded to the rights and liabilities of the Ven. Sisters, O. S. B.; that after respondent became the owner the deceased was wrongfully discharged; that respondent completed the construction of the buildings; and that the deceased was ready and willing at all times to perform. A general demurrer to the complaint was sustained and upon refusal to plead further, judgment was entered in favor of respondent.

The contract of employment set forth in the complaint was between deceased and Ven. Sisters, O. S. B., signed "Mother Superior, Parties of the First Part." There is no allegation in the complaint relative to the capacity of Ven. Sisters, O. S. B., or that respondent had any connection with such organization, or that the personnel of Ven. Sisters, O. S. B., was the same as respondent's membership, or that there was any fraud in the change of organization.

Inability of the master to perform his contracts such as would arise from a closing out or change of business terminates such a contract as was entered into between deceased and Ven. Sisters, O. S. B. (White v. Lumiere North American Co., 79 Vt. 206, 64 A. 1121, 6 L. R. A., N. S., 80 note; 39 C. J. 76.) Appellant does not seek recovery from the original employer but from the successor. Therefore, in order to state a cause of action arising out of the relation of employer and employee appellant must show a contract, express or implied, with respondent. (Ramon v. Interstate Utilities Co., 31 Idaho 117, 170 P. 88; McDowell v. Duer, 78 Ind.App. 440, 133 N.E. 839; Nissen Transfer & Storage v. Miller, 72 Ind.App. 261, 125 N.E. 652; C. C. Slaughter Co. v. Pastrana (Tex. Civ. App.), 217 S.W. 749.) No express contract was alleged as between decedent and respondent, appellant apparently resting her claim on an implied promise of respondent to assume the rights, duties and obligations of Ven. Sisters, O. S. B. The only allegation with respect to such assumption was merely a legal conclusion. (Roharer v. Middlesboro Town & Lands Co., 103 Ky. 146, 44 S.W. 448; Cairo & Vincennes R. R. Co. v. Dodge, 72 Ill. 253; Kreidler v. Hyde, 120 Ill.App. 505; Automatic S. Mach. Co. v. Twisted W. & S. Co., 159 A.D. 656, 144 N.Y.S. 1037; Fireman's Fund Ins. Co. v. American M. M....

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Whiffin v. Union Pacific Railroad Co.
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court
    • April 6, 1939
    ... ... demurrer, however, does not admit as statements of fact, ... conclusions of law. ( Groshoff v. St. Gertrude's ... Convent, 44 Idaho 554, 258 P. 528; Smallwood v ... Jeter, 42 Idaho 169, ... ...
  • Corey v. Beck, 6476
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court
    • October 16, 1937
    ... ... demurrer. (Burkhart v. Reed, 2 Idaho 503, 22 P. 1; ... Groshoff v. Saint Gertrudes Convent, 44 Idaho 554, ... 258 P. 528 ... The ... general rule that ... ...
  • IN RE GREATER SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY HOSP. FOUNDATION
    • United States
    • United States Bankruptcy Courts – District of Columbia Circuit
    • July 9, 2001
    ...Corp., 167 B.R. 786 (Bankr.W.D.Pa.1994). 29 In addition to the severance pay cases, the debtors cite Groshoff v. St. Gertrude's Convent, 44 Idaho 554, 258 P. 528 (1927) (involving the plainly irrelevant question of liability of a successor owner to the original employer's employee), and Phi......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT