N. B. Brown & Co. v. The St. John Trust Company

Citation80 P. 37,71 Kan. 134
Decision Date11 March 1905
Docket Number13,992
CourtKansas Supreme Court
PartiesN. B. BROWN & CO. v. THE ST. JOHN TRUST COMPANY

Decided January, 1905.

Error from Reno district court; MATTHEW P. SIMPSON, judge.

STATEMENT.

THE alleged non-compliance with a contract made between N. B Brown & Co. and the St. John Trust Company for the pasturage of cattle was the basis of an action brought by the former against the latter. The following is a copy of the contract:

"This is to certify that the undersigned has this day contracted to receive from N. B. Brown & Co., of Midland, Tex eighteen hundred (1800) head of mixed cattle, at the stock-yards at Garden City, Kan., which they take for the pasturing season of 1902 at two dollars ($ 2) per head for the season or any part thereof, and such season is to expire on the 15th day of October, 1902.

"The undersigned agree to become responsible to said N. B. Brown & Co. for the safe care and keeping of said eighteen hundred (1800) cattle, except those that may die by natural death, and in case of said natural death they are to show brands where the cattle have died. They agree to deliver the same in the stock-yards at Garden City, Kan., and such delivery is to be made in lots of not less than two hundred (200) or more, when called for upon reasonable notice by N B. Brown & Co., on or before October 15, 1902.

"The undersigned agree not to overstock the pasture where the cattle are kept, and not to put other than the eighteen hundred (1800) cattle described in this contract in said pasture, and agree to furnish abundance of salt and water for the well-keeping of said cattle.

"Said pasture is known as the Stevens pasture, and is located sixteen miles (16) southwest of Garden City, Kan. Said N. B Brown & Co. are to pay five hundred ($ 500) dollars when the cattle are put in the pasture, and the remainder of the pasture bill when cattle are delivered to them in the stock-yards at Garden City, Kan. All cattle to be branded in one of the following brands: [Description.]

"Any cattle that are lost other than by natural death, through the neglect of the undersigned, are to be paid for at their reasonable market value. Said Brown & Co. agree to receive said cattle at the Garden City stock-yards upon their return from the pasture, and to pay the pasture bill on same as above set forth.

"This May 15, 1902.

(Signed)

THE ST. JOHN TRUST CO.,

(SEAL.)

By A. E. ASHER, Secretary.

By HOWARD GRAY, Treasurer.

N. B. BROWN & CO."

The overstocking of the pasture, and the failure to furnish sufficient salt and water for the cattle, are the breaches of which complaint is made. After the plaintiffs offered their evidence the court sustained a demurrer thereto, and gave judgment for the defendant. The plaintiffs complain.

Judgment affirmed.

SYLLABUS

SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.

1. CONTRACTS--Interpretation. The interpretation of an unambiguous written contract is a matter of law for the court, and such a contract, when completed, is supposed to embody all prior understandings and negotiations, and is not to be enlarged, varied or contradicted by parol testimony.

2. CONTRACTS--Terms Construed. The contract in question held to be for the furnishing of a particular pasture, and not for furnishing sufficient pasturage for a certain number of cattle.

3. CONTRACTS--Liability for Damages. The neglect of duties devolving on plaintiffs' own agent furnishes them no basis for the recovery of damages from the defendant.

G. L. Miller, for plaintiffs in error.

George A. Vandeveer, and F. L. Martin, for defendant in error.

JOHNSTON C. J. All the Justices concurring. MASON, J., not sitting.

OPINION

JOHNSTON, C. J.:

The result of this proceeding depends mainly upon the interpretation to be placed upon the contract quoted in the foregoing statement. There had been negotiations between the parties for pasture in Kansas for cattle then in Texas, and a representative of N. B. Brown & Co. came to Hutchinson Kan., expecting to rent the Pierceville pasture, but when he arrived he found that the defendant had already disposed...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 cases
  • Fuchs v. Leahy
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • October 3, 1928
    ...141 S.W. 547; Ringer v. Wilkins, 183 Pac. 988; 2 C.J. 855; 2 Mechem on Agency, sec. 2140; Walker, Real Estate Agency, 300; Brown v. Trust Co., 71 Kan. 134; Blair v. Baird, 43 Tex. Civ. App. 134; Smith v. Farrell, 66 Mo. App. 8; Pine Mtn. Iron & Coal Co. v. Bailey, 94 Fed. 258; Bank of Milfo......
  • The Kansas Wheat Growers Association v. Rowan
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • April 7, 1928
    ... ... contradiction thereto. In Brown v. Trust Co., 71 ... Kan. 134, 80 P. 37, it was said: ... ...
  • Murphy v. Keating
    • United States
    • Minnesota Supreme Court
    • January 13, 1939
    ... ... [283 N.W. 391] ...           [204 ... Minn. 270] John M. Gannon, of Hibbing, for appellants ...           H. A ... Sanborn, 315 Pa. 188, 192, 172 A. 657, ... 658; N. B. Brown & Co. v. St. John Trust Co., 71 ... Kan. 134, 138, 80 P. 37, 38; 2 C.J ... the purpose of caring for injured employes of the railway ... company and their families. It was not incorporated. The [204 ... Minn. 279] ... ...
  • Cox v. Chase
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • February 10, 1917
    ...the pasturage of cattle, and is not a lease." 95 Kan. 535, 148 P. 768, L. R. A. 1915E, 590. It was said that in the case of Brown v. Trust Co., 71 Kan. 134, 80 P. 37, on by the plaintiff, the parties went over the pasture and examined it before contracting. "While here the defendants had ne......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT