Louisiana Northwest R. Co. v. McMorella
| Decision Date | 08 March 1926 |
| Docket Number | (No. 222.) |
| Citation | 282 S.W. 6 |
| Parties | LOUISIANA NORTHWEST R. CO. v. McMORELLA. |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Columbia County; L. S. Britt, Judge.
Action by Elizabeth McMorella against E. R. Bernstein, as receiver of the Louisiana & Northwest Railroad Company, and the Louisiana Northwest Railroad Company. Judgment for the plaintiff, and the Railroad Company appeals. Affirmed.
Elizabeth McMorella sued E. R. Bernstein, as receiver of the Louisiana & Northwest Railroad Company, and the Louisiana Northwest Railroad Company, to recover the sum of $3,000 alleged to be due her for services performed for said railroad company.
The plaintiff was a witness for herself. According to her testimony in January, 1919, she entered into a contract with Geo. W. Hunter, as receiver of the Louisiana & Northwest Railroad Company, to perform certain services for said railroad company and continued in its service under the terms of the contract until Geo. W. Hunter ceased to be receiver in October, 1920. Under the contract as first made she was to get out ties for the company and to receive a commission therefor and a stipulated salary per month. She was also required to look after certain lands which a railroad company was attempting to sell to Bulgarian colonists. In the summer of 1920, it was agreed that the plaintiff should be paid a monthly salary of $250 per month and a commission of 3 cents per tie for all ties purchased up to a maximum of $100,000 annually, which would give her the maximum income of $6,000 yearly. The agreement was in writing and was to operate retrospectively so that it would begin the 1st of July, 1919, and was to continue from that day until the final discharge of the plaintiff, which could only be done by giving 30 days' notice to her. The contract was approved by the judge of the federal court in which the receivership was pending. G. W. Hunter was discharged as receiver on October 1, 1920, and the plaintiff was discharged in a short time thereafter. During the time she was in the service of the railroad company she furnished 128,402 pine ties, 424 gum ties, and 14,867 oak ties. When Hunter resigned he filed a statement of his account in the federal court, which was approved by the judge of said court. His final statement included an itemized statement of the account of the plaintiff with the railroad company and showed a balance due her as of November 1, 1920, of $2,467.46. The itemized account of the plaintiff as sued on is as follows:
Magnolia, Arkansas, September 8, 1922
Receiver Louisiana & Northwest Railroad, Dr., to
Elizabeth McMorella, Cr
Balance as of November 1, 1920.............. $2,467 46
Salary for November, 1920 — 23 days at $250
per month ................................ 191 59
Legal expenses
McKay & Smith, attorneys............ $500 00
Kate McKey, transcript, etc......... 100 00
Court fees ......................... 198 50
_______
798 50
Care of live stock
Feed ............................... $301 00
Caretaker .......................... 145 00
_______
446 00
Sundry expenses
Railway fares between Magnolia
and Mohawk ........................ $ 90 00
Subsistence ........................ 540 00
Automobile hire .................... 200 00
Travel ............................. 192 36
Stenographer ....................... 50 00 1,072 84
_________
Total .................................... $4,976 39
Less cash collection of colony applied ...... 1,976 39
_________
Balance due .............................. $3,000 00
The first item of the account as above stated was the balance due her as shown by the report of Geo. W. Hunter as receiver and approved by the court when he was discharged as receiver. The salary item of $191.59 was due her, because under the terms of the contract she was entitled to 30 days' notice and continued in the service of the company for 23 days after she received notice that she had been discharged. The $500 which she paid McKay & Smith, attorneys, was for services performed by them in clearing the title to certain lands owned by the railroad company. For convenience the legal title to these lands had been placed in the plaintiff and it was necessary that she should bring suit in order to perfect the title to them. Under her agreement with the receiver she had employed McKay & Smith for that purpose and had paid them $500, which was a reasonable sum for their services. Pursuant to her agreement with the railroad company she had conveyed the lands to them after the titles had been settled. The amount paid Kate McKey was for services as stenographer in making out a report of the proceedings and services of the plaintiff with regard to all matters and items embraced in carrying out her contract, and was worth $100. The $198.50 included the court costs which the plaintiff incurred in perfecting the title to said lands.
She had charge of the live stock belonging to the defendant at the time she was notified of her discharge and continued to have the live stock fed and cared for until the railroad company relieved her of this responsibility. In this way she paid $301 for feed and $145 for a caretaker for said live stock. It was necessary that the stock should be fed and cared for until she was relieved of all responsibility in the matter. The amount of $90 was spent by her for railway fare in transacting the business of the railroad company and she was entitled to this amount under her contract. The $540 for subsistence claimed by her was for hotel bills and other traveling expenses. She was allowed her traveling expenses under the terms of her contract with the railroad company and actually spent more than the amount claimed. The $200 for automobile hire was for the purpose of transportation for herself in carrying on the business of the company when she could not secure speedy transportation on the railroad's trains. The amount of $192.36 was for traveling expenses when she was sent out on the business of the company. The $40 stenographer's fees was for letters written relative to the business of the company and extended over a period of one year.
Geo. W. Hunter corroborated the testimony of the plaintiff...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Louisiana Northwest Railroad Company v. McMorella
-
Lester v. Thomas
...may be referred to as explanatory of the allegations of the complaint. Abbott v. Rowan, 33 Ark. 593, and Louisiana Northwest R. Co. v. McMorella, 170 Ark. 921, 282 S. W. 6. When the whole complaint is considered with the exhibit just referred to, we are of the that insolvency at the time th......