Ruckman v. R. C. Stone Milling Co.

• Decision Date: 06 December 1909
• Parties: RUCKMAN v. R. C. STONE MILLING CO.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

123 S.W. 69

RUCKMAN v. R. C. STONE MILLING CO.

Springfield Court of Appeals. Missouri.

December 6, 1909.

1. EVIDENCE (§ 378) — DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE—PRELIMINARY EVIDENCE OF AUTHORITY.

In an action against a milling company for breach of contract of employment based in part on a wrongful discharge, testimony of plaintiff that the person who wrote him a letter of discharge had succeeded to the duties of superintendent at the mill where plaintiff was employed, made a prima facie showing of authority in such person to act for defendant so as to entitle plaintiff to the admission of such letter.

2. PLEADING (§ 291)—ACTION ON WRITTEN CONTRACT—NECESSITY OF DENIAL OF EXECUTION UNDER OATH AS AFFECTING PROOF.

In an action against a milling company for breach of a contract of employment purporting on its face to be executed by both parties, plaintiff signing for himself, and another signing for defendant as superintendent, Rev. St. 1899, § 746 (Ann. St. 1906, p. 731), requiring a denial of the execution of a contract alleged to have been executed by the pleader to be under oath, does not apply, and a general denial raised the issue of its execution so that it devolved on plaintiff to prove it before it could be admitted.

3. EVIDENCE (§ 373) — DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE—PROOF OF WRITTEN CONTRACT EXECUTED BY AGENT.

In an action against a milling company for breach of a contract of employment, proof that the person signing it for defendant had authority to do so was not alone sufficient to admit it in evidence, but plaintiff should have also shown that such person did sign it, and not having done so it was properly excluded.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Barry County; F. C. Johnson, Judge.

Action by W. E. Ruckman against the R. C. Stone Milling Company. Plaintiff having taken a nonsuit with leave to set the same aside, his motion for that purpose was overruled, and he appeals. Affirmed.

This is an action for breach of contract of employment. The petition declares upon a written contract, dated October 10, 1907, by which it is charged defendant employed plaintiff for one year as elevator foreman at the mill of defendant in Republic, Mo., at a salary of $720, to be paid monthly, and that there was a breach of said contract by defendant failing to furnish a helper, as provided in the contract, and a further breach by a wrongful discharge of the plaintiff on November 23, 1907. The answer was a general denial. Jury was waived, and trial was had by the court. The plaintiff offered in evidence the contract, which appeared on its face to be signed by plaintiff and by defendant—R. C. Stone Milling Company, by J. A. McPhayden, Supt. This was objected to by defendant, for the reason that its execution had not been proven and no authority shown on the part of the superintendent to sign it, if he did sign it. The court sustained the objection. The plaintiff then offered evidence tending to show that McPhayden, by reason of his employment and duties which he performed, was authorized to sign this contract, but offered no evidence to show that he...