Merrill v. W. Union Tel. Co.
| Decision Date | 19 January 1886 |
| Citation | 78 Me. 97,2 A. 847 |
| Parties | MERRILL v. WESTERN UNION TEL. Co. |
| Court | Maine Supreme Court |
Savage & Oakes, for plaintiff.
Baker, Baker & Cornish, for defendant.
HASKELL, J. Damages are sought for the inexcusable non-delivery of a telegram, whereby the plaintiff was prevented from performing his contract to labor. The plaintiff's agent completed a verbal contract that the plaintiff should labor for a manufacturer at $2.25 per day, commencing Monday, September 1st, and seasonably required the defendant to transmit a message to the plaintiff notifying him of its terms. The message was not delivered in season for the plaintiff to begin his work as stipulated, and thereby he lost his employment. The defendant denies liability beyond nominal damages. The contract was defeasible at the will of either party. How, then, can any substantial damage be measured ? Had the engagement to employ the plaintiff been for a stipulated and definite period, not over one year, the plaintiff would have a right to demand damages that could be definitely measured and assessed. He would then have been entitled to enjoy the fruit of his labor during the time of his engagement; but, under the terms of the contract in proof, he was liable to be dismissed from his employment as soon as he had entered upon it, and it cannot be known what damages he has suffered in the premises. The plaintiff must prove his damages before they can be assessed. The case fails to show facts that warrant greater than nominal damages. Miller v. Mariners' Church, 7 Me. 51; Blaisdell v. Lewis, 32 Me. 515; True v. International Tel. Co., 60 Me. 9; Griffin v. Colver, 16 N. Y. 489.
Defendant defaulted for one dollar.
1 Reported by Baker, Baker & Cornish, Esqs., of the Augusta bar.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mcmillan v. W.U. Tel. Co.
... 53 So. 329 60 Fla. 131 McMILLAN et al. v. WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH CO. Florida Supreme Court March 4, 1910 ... On ... Rehearing, June 25, 1910 ... Headnotes ... Filed Oct. 7, 1910 ... a human mind. See Vicars v. Wilcocks, 8 East, 1; Walser v ... Western Union Tel. Co., supra; Merrill v. Western Union ... Tel. Co., 78 Me. 97, 2 A. 847. See, also, Western ... Union Tel. Co. v. Schriver, 141 F. 538, 72 C. C. A. 596, ... 4 L. R ... ...
-
Western Union Telegraph Company v. Love Banks Company
... ... in line with the decided weight of authority. Vedder ... v. Fellows, 20 N.Y. 126; Ill. Cent. R ... Co. v. Whittemore, 43 Ill. 420; W. U. Tel ... Co. v. Crider, 107 Ky. 600, 54 S.W. 963; ... Kansas & A. v. Railway Co. v. Dye, 70 F ... 24; Little Rock & M. Railway Co. v. Barry, ... 84 ... ...
-
Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Bickerstaff
...using other means of communication is too remote and speculative. 91 S.W. 257; 54 Id. 825; 26 Id. 490; 27 Id. 52; 90 Ky. 265; 30 S.W. 880; 78 Me. 97; 79 Miss. 58; 94 Ga. 202; 39 Kans. 580; 18 719; 30 Oh. St. 555; 27 Am. St. 485. The peremptory instruction should have been granted. 2. The ve......
-
Sultan v. Western Union Telegraph Company
... ... hold the bank parties in Mangum, with whom he dealt, liable ... See Thompson on Electricity, 91; Western Union Tel. Co ... v. Hall, 124 U.S. 44, 31 L.Ed. 279; Richmond Mills ... v. Western Union Tel. Co., 51 S.E. 290; citing Beatty ... Lumber Co. v. Western ... are contingent upon its acceptance. Walker v. Western ... Union Tel. Co., 114 N.C. 440; Merrill v. Western ... Union Tel. Co., 78 Me. 97; Clay v. Telegraph ... Co., 81 Ga, 285; Thompson on Electricity 21; Smith v ... Telegraph Co., 8 Ky ... ...