Hurley v. Great Falls Baseball Ass'n
| Decision Date | 22 January 1921 |
| Docket Number | 4236. |
| Citation | 195 P. 559,59 Mont. 21 |
| Parties | HURLEY v. GREAT FALLS BASEBALL ASS'N. |
| Court | Montana Supreme Court |
Appeal from District Court, Cascade County; H. H. Ewing, Judge.
Action by William Hurley against the Great Falls Baseball Association. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Reversed and remanded.
Norris & Hurd, of Great Falls, for appellant.
Peters & Smith, of Great Falls, for respondent.
On March 16, 1916, the parties hereto entered into a contract in writing by the terms of which plaintiff was employed for six months, at a salary of $300 per month, as captain, manager and first baseman of defendant's baseball club. The contract provided that within 30 days from its date plaintiff should purchase and pay for 100 shares of the capital stock of the defendant corporation. This action was brought in July, 1916, and in his complaint plaintiff sets forth at length the contract of employment, and alleges that within 30 days he purchased the 100 shares of stock; that he entered upon the discharge of his duties under the contract and fully performed the same up to June 23; that he was paid for his services up to June 1, and no more; that on June 23 defendant, without cause, wrongfully discharged him as captain and manager of its ball club; that he was ready able, and willing to complete performance under the contract but was denied the right to do so; that he was unable to secure employment elsewhere; that by reason of his wrongful discharge the compensation to which he would have been entitled was lost to him; that he demanded payment of the amount claimed; and that payment was refused. The complaint sets forth the amount of wages earned from June 1 to June 23, and the amount which he would have earned from June 23 to the end of the term, if he had been permitted to complete performance. The prayer is for judgment for the total of these two amounts.
The answer consists of a general denial of certain allegations of the complaint, a complete special defense, a partial defense and four counterclaims. All affirmative allegations were put in issue by reply. Upon the trial the court sustained defendant's objection to the introduction of any evidence on the ground that the complaint does not state a cause of action; permitted the withdrawal of the several counterclaims; dismissed the complaint; and rendered and had entered a judgment for the defendant's costs. From that...
To continue reading
Request your trial