Scoville Plumbing Co. v. Highland Park Land Co.

• Citation: 68 N.W. 684,99 Iowa 303
• Parties: THE SCOVILLE PLUMBING COMPANY, Appellant, v. THE HIGHLAND PARK LAND COMPANY
• Decision Date: 17 October 1896
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Iowa

68 N.W. 684

99 Iowa 303

THE SCOVILLE PLUMBING COMPANY, Appellant, v. THE HIGHLAND PARK LAND COMPANY

Supreme Court of Iowa, Des Moines

October 17, 1896

Appeal from Polk District Court.--HON. C. P. HOLMES, Judge.

THE defendant company is a corporation, as is also the Oak & Highland Park Improvement Company. Both corporations owned lots in a part of the city of Des Moines. The two corporations have the same secretary, one W. W. Fink, and the same treasurer, one V. F. Newell. O. H. Longwell, acting for himself and for the Oak & Highland Park Improvement Company made a contract with the plaintiff company, through its manager, Mr. Scoville, for the construction of a tile drain from his own cellar, and also one from the cellar on an adjoining lot, belonging to the Oak & Highland Park Improvement Company, for the price of one hundred and forty-seven dollars. The plaintiff company also made a contract with Mr. Wilcoxen, who was a member of the Highland Park Land Company, to put a tile drain on its land, which was adjoining that of the Oak & Highland Park Improvement Company. The work was done on both contracts. In the record is a bill for one hundred and forty-seven dollars to O. H Longwell from the Scoville Plumbing Company, a bill for one hundred and sixty dollars to Highland Park Land Company, and an order on V. F. Newell, treasurer of Highland Park Land Company, drawn by its secretary, W. W. Fink, payable to Scoville Plumbing Company, for one hundred and sixty dollars with the indorsement of the Scoville Plumbing Company on the back. It seems that the order on the treasurer of the Highland Park Land Company, indorsed by the plaintiff, was surrendered to Fink, as secretary of the Oak & Highland Park Improvement Company, and a note taken, signed by the Oak & Highland Park Improvement Company, for the amount due for the construction of both drains. The Oak & Highland Park Improvement Company then presented an order, indorsed by the plaintiff company, to the treasurer of the Highland Park Land Company. The plaintiff brought suit on the note against the latter company, but withdrew it, and instituted this to recover for the work done on both contracts. The court, at the close of the evidence, directed a verdict for defendant. The plaintiff appealed.

Affirmed.

A. A. Haskins for appellant.

Dulley & Coffin for appellee.

OPINION

GRANGER, J.

For brevity we will designate the defendant the land company, and the other corporation the improvement company. The following are the grounds of the motion on which the court directed the verdict for the defendant: "First. For the reason that the drain ordered by Longwell was never contracted for by the defendant company, the evidence showing the drain was never ordered by the defendant company, nor any one else authorized by it to order same, nor ever agreed to pay for same. Second. For the reason that the evidence shows the defendant company has paid for the second drain the sum of one hundred and sixty dollars, and that the plaintiff accepted the note of the Oak & Highland Park Improvement Company,...