Mills v. McGaffee
| Decision Date | 30 January 1953 |
| Citation | 254 S.W.2d 716 |
| Parties | MILLS v. McGAFFEE et al. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky |
Cleon K. Calvert, Pineville, for appellant.
A. E. Funk, Jr., Middlesboro, for appellees.
This action in assumpsit was brought against the members of the Lone Jack Board of Education of Bell County by plaintiff below and appellant here, Sawyer A. Mills, to recover $774, with interest thereon at 6% per annum from October 1, 1945, claimed to be the balance due him on an alleged contract of employment with the board. Mills' petition was dismissed and he appeals.
The case was submitted to the circuit judge on a written stipulation, the material portions of which are: On July 1, 1944, appellees employed Mills as the board secretary for a term of two years, ending July 1, 1946, at a salary of $86 per month; that an order was written on the minute book of the board, setting forth the foregoing facts of employment, signed by the chairman of the board and by Mills as secretary; that Mills was qualified to perform the work required of him; and that Mills accepted the employment and filled the position until October 1, 1945, when the board, without any notice or hearing or excuse given, entered another order discharging Mills. This action was instituted on September 4, 1951, more than 5 years from the expiration date of the contract.
The precise question raised on this appeal is: Did the written order of the school board in the minute book evidencing the agreement constitute such a contract in writing as to remove an action thereon from the application of KRS 413.120(1), the 5-year statute of limitations, and make KRS 413.090(2), the 15-year statute of limitations, controlling?
Appellees argue that the entry in the minute book is nothing more than a written memorandum or note evidencing an oral agreement between the board and Mills and that, although KRS 371.010(7) specifically provides that such a written memorandum or note signed by the party to be charged shall remove a contract from the provisions of the statute of frauds, the agreement does not cease to be an oral one. Furthermore, appellees contend the 5-year statute of limitations has no such exception as that mentioned in the statute of frauds and they claim KRS 413.120(1), in that it requires the contract to be whooly in writing, applies here because they insist this is an action upon an oral contract which Mills seeks to prove solely by a written memorandum. We agree that, if the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Conway v. Portfolio Recovery Assocs., LLC, Civil No. 13–07–GFVT.
...agreement to constitute a written contract “all its terms and provisions can be ascertained from the instrument itself.” Mills v. McGaffee, 254 S.W.2d 716, 717 (Ky.1953) (internal citations omitted). As in Delrey, Conway's Capital One customer agreement lacks several essential terms of a wr......
-
Grant v. Williams
...writing may be a link in the chain of evidence establishing liability or there is a parol acceptance of a written offer.' Mills v. McGaffee, Ky., 254 S.W.2d 716, 717, states the rule in this manner: '* * * if the contract be partly oral and partly in writing or if a written agreement is so ......
-
Evans v. Yakima Valley Grape Growers Ass'n
...v. Nabob Silver-Lead Co., 1933, 174 Wash. 5, 24 P.2d 114.' A Kentucky court recently considered the same problem in Mills v. McGaffee, Ky.1953, 254 S.W.2d 716. It had this to 'The precise question raised on this appeal is: Did the written order of the school board in the minute book evidenc......
-
Gray v. INTERNATIONAL ASS'N OF HEAT & FI & AW, L. NO. 51, 20677.
...as to require parole evidence of its terms are generally not "contracts in writing" within the meaning of the statute. Mills v. McGaffee, 254 S.W.2d 716 (Ky.1953). The contract involved here, however, is made up of the union constitution and its bylaws. These are completely in writing and r......