Maxwell v. Harroun

• Decision Date: 22 November 1915
• Docket Number: No. 11730.,11730.
• Citation: 180 S.W. 993
• Parties: MAXWELL v. HARROUN
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

180 S.W. 993

MAXWELL v. HARROUN

No. 11730.

Kansas City Court of Appeals, Missouri.

November 22, 1915.

Rehearing Denied December 18, 1915.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Buchanan County; Thos. B. Allen, Judge.

"Not to be officially published."

Action by Edward J. Maxwell against W. Harroun. From judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

A. Bowers, of St. Joseph, for appellant. Sam Wilcox, of St. Joseph, for respondent.

JOHNSON, J.

This suit, which originated before a justice of the peace, is for the recovery of three monthly payments, of $25 each, plaintiff alleges W. H. Harroun was required to make by the terms of the following written instrument, executed and de livered to plaintiff by defendant on March 23, 1914:

"For and in consideration of the sum of one dollar in hand paid to W. H. Harroun for the account of Harroun Bros. by Edward J. Maxwell, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, we hereby agree to pay, or cause to be paid, to the said Edward J. Maxwell, the sum of twenty-five ($25.00) dollars some time during each and every calendar month during the remainder of the life of said Edward J. Maxwell, commencing with April, 1914, upon condition that the 440 shares of the capital stock of the Lucky Tiger Combination Gold Mining Company, now owned by Nellie Maxwell, wife of said Edward J. Maxwell, shall remain her property unincumbered, and remain of record in her name upon the books of the said Lucky Tiger Combination Gold Mining Company. Should the said Nellie Maxwell ever, for any cause whatever, now or hereafter, sell., transfer, convey, pledge, or hypothecate said stock in the Lucky Tiger Combination Gold Mining Company, or any part thereof, without the written consent of A. L. Harroun, Edna Harroun, W. H. Harroun, or any one of them, then and in that event this agreement shall cease and be no longer binding upon the undersigned Harroun Brothers.

                  [Signed]           Harroun' Brothers
                                      "By W. H. Harroun."
                

After the cause was lodged in the circuit court defendant filed a verified answer which, in addition to a general denial, contained a plea of no consideration. A jury was waived, and after hearing the evidence the court rendered judgment for plaintiff for the full amount demanded. No declarations of law were requested or given. After his motions for a new trial and in arrest of judgment were overruled defendant appealed.

Plaintiff, who is an old man in poor health, had been employed for many years by Edna Harroun, A. L. Harroun, and W. H. Harroun, who were engaged as partners in the grain business in St. Joseph. When the employment was terminated he presented a claim to defendant of over $6,000 growing out of his employment. The claim was disputed, was compromised by the parties, and defendant paid plaintiff a small sum of money in full settlement. The rulings of the court on the admission of evidence leaves the record barren of any proof that the obligation defendant purported to assume under the agreement in suit was in partial settlement of the disputed claim, though that agreement was executed on the day of the settlement.

From the position the parties (especially plaintiff) took at the trial, it appears that...