Krebs Mfg. Co. v. Brown

• Decision Date: 19 November 1895
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court
• Parties: KREBS MANUF'G CO. v. BROWN ET AL.

18 So. 659

108 Ala. 508

KREBS MANUF'G CO. v. BROWN ET AL.

Supreme Court of Alabama

November 19, 1895

Appeal from circuit court, Jefferson county; James J. Banks, Judge.

Action by the Krebs Manufacturing Company against W. D. Brown and another to recover for work and labor done by plaintiff under a contract. The cause was tried by the court without the intervention of a jury. Judgment was rendered for defendants and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

B. C Jones, for appellant.

HEAD J.

According to the plea, the plaintiff contracted with the defendants to put in for the latter a window, in a storehouse occupied by defendants, at the price of $26. The window was to be put in the first-class order and workmanship in every way, but, as the plea alleges, the plaintiff did the work in a negligent and unskillful manner, and on account of the work being done so poorly, the rain came in through the window, where the same was connected to the house, and damaged certain specified articles of property belonging to the defendants to the extent of $26.25, which sum defendants offer to recoup from the demand of the plaintiff, who sues to recover the contract price of the work.

It is objected, by demurrer to the plea, that the damages claimed are remote and speculative, and not the natural consequence of any act of the plaintiff. A storehouse is a house for the storage of goods. It was natural, and to be expected, that defendants would keep goods stored therein. If, by reason of the negligent and improper manner in which the window was put in, the rain blew in and injured goods therein stored, such injury was the direct and proximate result of the plaintiff's default; and the amount, or extent in money, of such injury is easily capable of exact ascertainment. Culver v. Hill, 68 Ala. 66. It is also demurred that the plea fails to set out wherein the work was defective. We think the averment that, by reason of the negligent, unskillful, and poor manner of doing the work, the rain came in through the window where the same was connected to the house, is sufficient to inform the plaintiff wherein the work was defective. The plea sufficiently shows that the work was not done in accordance with the contract. It was not necessary that the plaintiff should have guarantied the window against leakage. It is also demurred that the damages claimed by the plea do not arise out of the subject-matter of the suit. This ground is manifestly not well taken. Id. These are all the grounds of demurrer necessary to notice. They were properly overruled by the court.

When de...