Irwin v. Nichols, Dean & Gregg

• Decision Date: 06 July 1908
• Citation: 112 S.W. 209
• Parties: IRWIN v. NICHOLS, DEAN & GREGG.
• Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

Page 209

112 S.W. 209

IRWIN v.NICHOLS, DEAN & GREGG.

Supreme Court of Arkansas.

July 6, 1908.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Randolph County; J. W. Meeks, Judge.

Action by Fred Irwin against Nichols, Dean & Gregg.From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals.Affirmed.

This was an action brought by appellant to recover from appellee $189.75 as balance due him under a contract for labor.He alleges in his amended complaint: That defendant is a Minnesota corporation doing business in this state, having its principal place of business for this state at Pocahontas, in Randolph county.That defendant is engaged in sawmilling and allied businesses.That in October, 1906, plaintiff was in the employ of a sawmill company at Knobel, Ark., getting $3 a day for each day he worked.That on October 15, 1906, he received from defendant, through their Pocahontas office, a proposition in writing whereby defendant proposed to employ plaintiff at their Pocahontas sawmill and pay him $2.50 a day straight time.A copy of defendant's written proposition was filed with complaint as "Exhibit A."That plaintiff immediately accepted said proposition by means of a letter written and deposited by him in the post office at Knobel inclosed in an envelope sealed and sufficiently stamped for carriage to defendant's Pocahontas office, known as "Pocahontas Bending Works," to whom the letter was plainly addressed.That said letter of acceptance is not in plaintiff's possession.That pursuant to the contract thus made plaintiff gave up his employment at Knobel, and at great expense to himself moved to Pocahontas, where he offered himself ready at all times to perform the duties assigned him by the defendant from November 1, 1906, until July 3, 1907.That during a large portion of this time defendant's mill was not run, and, although he held himself ready at all times to perform such duties as defendant should assign him, yet defendant has refused, and still refuses, to pay him for any of the time defendant's sawmill has been idle.Plaintiff further alleged: That it was the promise of steady employment, whereby he would not have to lose his wages during breakdowns or times of high water, that induced him to accept defendant's offer of employment; that he was receiving a greater price per day at Knobel than he was promised by defendant, but because at Knobel he had to lose the time the mill was idle, while he was promised straight time by defendant, he left his job at Knobel and accepted defendant's offer; and that he has been paid for all his time while in defendant's employ $335.25, while he was in such employment for 210 working days for which he is entitled to $2.50 a day, making a total of $525, leaving a balance due him by defendant of $189.75, for which he prayed judgment.

Exhibit A to the amended complaint is in words and figures as follows: "Pocahontas Bending Works.Manufacturers of Wooden Wagon Stock, Oak and Hickory Spokes, Gum and Hardwood Lumber.J. C. Miller, Manager.Pocahontas, Arkansas, Oct. 15, 1906.Fred Irwin, Knobel, Ark. — Dear Sir: We have your letter of the 14th and note that you have decided to come back and work for us, and we are willing to allow you 10 hours for each day that we work a full...