Rogers v. Reynolds

Decision Date03 April 1917
Docket Number13779.
Citation95 Wash. 470,164 P. 80
CourtWashington Supreme Court
PartiesROGERS et al. v. REYNOLDS.

Department 1. Appeal from Superior Court, King County; Kenneth Mackintosh, Judge.

Proceedings by J. M. Rogers and others against W. P. Reynolds administrator of the estate of W. D. C. Spike, deceased, to enforce laborers' liens. Decree for claimants, and the administrator appeals. Affirmed.

Hudson Holt & Harmon, of Tacoma, for appellant.

Brady &amp Rummens, of Seattle, for respondents.

MORRIS J.

Respondents claim laborers' liens as coal miners upon certain property as the property of the Prince Coal Mines Company. The appeal is taken from a decree in their favor.

The appeal is narrowed down to two donkey engines, which appellant claims were not the property of the coal mines company, but were loaned to it for temporary use by a copartnership composed of W. D. C. Spike, deceased, and his brother, A. W. Spike. The mine was owned by one Lambert, with whom W. D. C. Spike made a contract under which he entered into possession and commenced operation. Shortly thereafter the Prince Coal Mines Company was organized, to which Spike transferred all his interest. The work for which liens are claimed was performed between November 1, 1914, and April 1, 1915, while the mine was operated by the coal mines company. On behalf of appellant it is claimed that it was established that these donkey engines were at all times the property of W. D. C. Spike and A. W. Spike, and were taken up to the mines in December, 1914, for temporary use only, and that it was the intention at that time that such use should continue 30 days, when the donkey engines were to be returned. Upon reaching the mine the engines were used continuously as part of the operating equipment until the mine was closed the last of March, 1915; one of the engines being used to pump water for the coal washers and the other attached to a boiler furnishing steam used in the operation of the bunkers and fan. So far as the record shows, there was nothing at the time the labor was performed to indicate there was any copartnership relation between the Spikes, or that these engines belonged to any one other than the company operating the mine. W. D. C. Spike was the main spirit in the Prince Coal Mines Company and practically the owner of its stock. There was nothing to indicate that these two donkey engines were other than the remainder of the personal property used in the development of the mine, or that any one other than W. D. C. Spike or the coal mines company claimed any interest in them. So far as the record shows, the present claim to these two engines was made for the first time after the death of W. D. C. Spike in the pleading of appellant. No such claim was made by W. D. C. Spike, who, prior to his death, had permitted a default to run against himself.

During negotiations looking to a settlement of these labor claims an attempt was made to bring about a settlement by giving a mortgage to a trustee on all the property at the mine. The description of the property in this mortgage was broad enough to include these two engines. During these negotiations W. D. C. Spike informed those present representing the different parties that these two engines were included in some form of security he had previously given a Tacoma bank to secure...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Bean v. Harris
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • October 16, 1923
    ...concealment of the true facts, so as to raise an equitable estoppel." Hilton v. Sloan, (Utah) 37 Utah 359, 108 P. 689; Rogers v. Reynolds (Wash.) 95 Wash. 470, 164 P. 80. "The laws is well settled that one having a title of record, so long as he may do no affirmative act to mislead or decei......
  • Andersonian Inv. Co. v. Wade
    • United States
    • Washington Supreme Court
    • October 1, 1919
    ... ... for his own advantage.' ... So ... Judge Morris, in the case of Rogers v. Reynolds, 95 ... Wash. 470, 164 P. 80: ... '* * * Neither is it necessary to point to any special ... word or act on the part of ... ...
  • Martin Coal & Coke Co. v. Brewer
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • March 7, 1939
    ... ... Yonkman v. Harvey, 133 Okl. 252, 271 P. 839; 10 ... R.C.L. 777 ...          Intervenors ... rely upon the case of Rogers v. Reynolds, 95 Wash ... 470, 164 P. 80, wherein it was held that a co-partnership ... which had loaned certain mining equipment to a mining ... ...
  • Martin Coal & Coke Co. v. Brewer
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • March 7, 1939
    ...ownership."See, also, Yonkman v. Harvey, 133 Okla. 252, 271 P. 839: 10 R. C. L. 777. ¶8 Interveners rely upon the case of Rogers v. Reynolds, 95 Wash. 470, 164 P. 80, wherein it was held that a copartnership which had loaned certain mining equipment to a mining company for use in operating ......
  • 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