Sourwine v. Mcroy Clay Works

• Decision Date: 13 October 1908
• Docket Number: 6,464
• Citation: 85 N.E. 782,42 Ind.App. 358
• Parties: SOURWINE v. MCROY CLAY WORKS ET AL
• Court: Indiana Appellate Court

85 N.E. 782

42 Ind.App. 358

SOURWINE v. MCROY CLAY WORKS ET AL

No. 6,464

Court of Appeals of Indiana

October 13, 1908

From Clay Circuit Court; Presley O. Colliver, Judge.

Action by John D. Sourwine against the McRoy Clay Works, and another. From a judgment for defendants, plaintiff appeals.

Affirmed.

A. C Miller and G. S. Payne, for appellant.

S. M McGregor, for appellees.

OPINION

ROBY J.

This is an action by a physician against a manufacturing corporation to recover for professional services rendered an employe of the corporation at the request of the corporation's superintendent. It is alleged, among other things, "that on or about October 27, 1904, defendant Edward R. Beidler, superintendent of the McRoy Clay Works, represented to this plaintiff that he was the authorized agent of said works, and that as such agent he had authority to employ and engage this plaintiff to do and perform certain services for his principal, said McRoy Clay Works; that, relying upon said representations, and believing said Edward R. Beidler to be then and there the duly authorized agent of said McRoy Clay Works, he did on said day enter into an agreement with said Edward R. Beidler that, in consideration of reasonable compensation, to be made by said McRoy Clay Works, he would do and perform certain services, to wit; to attend and treat one Ben Hendrix, an employe of said McRoy Clay Works; that, relying upon said representations, and so believing said defendant Edward R. Beidler to be the duly authorized agent of said works, he did on said day and on divers days thereafter fully perform and complete said services, a bill of particulars of which is filed herewith and marked exhibit A, and made a part hereof; that said services so performed by this plaintiff were of the value of $ 55.50. Further averments show a demand and refusal to pay, and judgment for the amount stated is prayed "against said McRoy Clay Works, and if said defendant Edward R. Beidler had no authority in fact as the agent of said McRoy Clay Works to employ this plaintiff, then he asks judgment in the sum of $ 55.50 against said defendant Edward R. Beidler."

Separate demurrers for want of facts by the McRoy Clay Works and Edward R. Beidler were sustained to the single paragraph of complaint, and the plaintiff appeals. Error is assigned in sustaining each of the demurrers.

The contract set up is valid only if the "facts leading up to it were so unusual and extreme as to impose upon the employer a duty analogous to that imposed upon railroad companies." Facts of this character are not set up in the complaint. The law is entirely well settled. Corporations whose "business is stationary" are under no duty "to furnish their workmen with medical services any more than they should be required to furnish them with dinners." Cushman v. Cloverland Coal, etc Co. (1908), 170 Ind. 402, 84 N.E. 759. This conclusion was authoritatively declared after extended consideration. The costs and expenses of medical service which might be fastened upon innocent stockholders, if the president and general officers of such corporations were given power to incur obligations of such a character, would probably, in view of the great number of accidents which are constantly happening, be considerable, and the...