Jesse C. Boyd v. Merriell

Decision Date30 September 1869
PartiesJESSE C. BOYDv.GEORGE MERRIELL.
CourtIllinois Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

APPEAL from the Superior Court of Chicago; the Hon. JOSEPH E. GARY, Judge, presiding.

The opinion states the case.

Messrs. DENT & BLACK, for the appellant.

Messrs. BONNEY, FAY & GRIGGS, for the appellee.

Mr. JUSTICE WALKER delivered the opinion of the Court: This was an action of assumpsit, brought by appellee against appellant, and several other persons, to recover the value of services rendered by appellee in traveling and examining silver mines in Colorado Territory, and for expenses incurred in performing the service. Appellant, only, appeared and defended the action, and judgment by default was rendered against the other defendants, upon whom service was had, and others not having been served, no proceedings were had against them. The declaration contained only the common counts for work and labor rendered, money paid, laid out and expended. Appellant filed the plea of the general issue, and a plea verified by affidavit, denying his joint liability with his co-defendants. Issues were formed upon these pleas, and the cause was submitted to the court for trial without the intervention of a jury, by consent of the parties. The court found the issues for plaintiff, and rendered judgment for the amount of his claim and costs of suit.

It is urged, that the evidence fails to support the finding of the court below. On the trial, appellee introduced James Larman, who was a defendant, as a witness, and he testified that appellee was employed by defendants to go to Colorado to examine mines there. He testifies that he was employed at a meeting of the association, of which defendant was a member; that defendant acted as chairman of the meeting, and that it was agreed the association would give him $50 per week and pay his expenses while thus engaged; that appellant was at the meeting; that he accompanied appellee to Colorado, and knew that he made the examination; that witness was present at the meeting when appellee made his report; that he was one of the persons who employed appellee.

The evidence shows that appellant was a member of the association, and present at the meeting at which appellee was employed to make the examination. Martin, the secretary, swears he was present, acting as secretary, and corroborates Larman in his testimony as to the employment, and it is shown by the minutes of the meeting, kept by the secretary. And appellee and others testify to his employment. On this question there seems to be no doubt, and he has made out a clear case, unless, for other reasons, he is not entitled to recover.

It is insisted, that Mrs. Larman, the wife of James Larman, was a member of the association, and that she should have been a defendant. Larman...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases

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