Sullivan v. Deiter

• Decision Date: 03 July 1891
• Citation: 49 N.W. 261,86 Mich. 404
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court
• Parties: SULLIVAN v. DEITER et al.

49 N.W. 261

86 Mich. 404

SULLIVAN v. DEITER et al.

Supreme Court of Michigan

July 3, 1891

Error to circuit court, Gogebic county; S. B. DABOLL, Judge.

C. F. Button, (M. M. Riley, of counsel,) for plaintiffs in error.

Kutts & Wilson, for defendant in error.

CHAMPLIN C.J.

The plaintiff, Sullivan, showed to the defendant Copps a mining location in the vicinity of Marenisco, Mich., and entered into an arrangement with him, by which Copps secured a mining option, and he and Sullivan went upon it, and worked together in developing it, as far as it was possible for them to do and also expended some money, Copps paying out rather more than Sullivan. Copps then wrote to Mr. Deiter, of Chicago, to come up and examine the location, with a view of getting him interested in the option. He came up, and looked over the location, and was satisfied with the prospect, and took some specimens of the ore back with him to Chicago to have them assayed, and in about two weeks he wrote Copps to come to Chicago. He went there with the knowledge of Mr. Sullivan and entered into an arrangement, which is not shown in the record, with the defendants Deiter, Wilgermarth, and Hiller under which they were to furnish every thing to go on and explore thoroughly, and Sullivan and Copps were to have their living, and have everything furnished. He endeavored to make an arrangement with them by which both he and Sullivan would draw wages, but they refused that, saying that he and Sullivan were to put in their labor against their capital and were to have a one-eighth interest each in the option. They were to put in capital to the extent of $10,000 for the purpose of exploring and developing the mine, if one existed there. Mr. Copps states that, on his return from Chicago, he informed Mr. Sullivan of the terms that he had made with the Chicago parties, and that Mr. Sullivan was satisfied with them. Mr. Sullivan testifies that he knew nothing of the arrangement made by Copps with the other parties in Chicago, except what Mr. Copps told him, and that he did not tell him that they were to put in their labor without pay. In the agreement made with the parties in Chicago, the one-eighth interest retained by Sullivan and Copps was to be non-assessable. The parties went on to develop the mine, and expended $10,000 and upwards. Mr. Sullivan testifies that, when Mr. Copps came back from Chicago, he informed him that he had entered into an arrangement with the other parties defendant, to develop the mine, put in their capital, and that he and Copps were to have a one-eighth interest each non-assessable; or, in other words that nothing should be charged against his interest for exploration until it should become a paying mine. He testifies that Copps claimed to be the superintendent and was representing the company; that he commenced work the next day, which was on the 30th day of August, 1888, and worked until the 14th day of December, 1888. He says that Copps agreed with him that he should receive for his wages $1.25 a day; that he also hired his wife to go to the mine and help work, and that she should have wages at the rate of $40 a month until such time as Mr. Copps' wife arrived, when they should have $20 each a month. He states that he has only received $10 for wages; that he ascertained that his name was not on the pay-roll; that he demanded to be paid wages when the other men were paid who were employed at the mine, and that Copps told him that he had to pay out so much he did not have enough, but, if he would wait until the next pay-day, he would get it all, but he never received any pay except the $10; that, on or about the 19th day of November, Mr. Hiller came to the mine, when he demanded his pay of Hiller, and Hiller told him that he should not pay him any; that the arrangement or agreement was that he and Mr. Copps were to put in their labor, without wages, and he states that that was the first time he heard of it; that he told Mr. Hiller that he never agreed to do anything of the kind, and demanded his wages right there, and Mr. Hiller refused to pay him; that he continued to work until the 14th day of December, when he sold out his one-eighth interest in the option to Mr. Deiter for $150 cash, and he and his wife left the mine on the 17th of December. He further testified that his wife commenced work on the 6th day of September, 1888, and worked until the 19th day of October, at $40 a month, and then Mrs. Copps came down, and his wife worked from the 19th day of October until the 17th of December at $20 a month, and that she had assigned her claim against the defendants to him; and he in the month of January, 1889, commenced suit by attachment against all the defendants for the amount which he claimed to be due him and his wife for wages. Mr. Copps, in his testimony, denies that he hired Mrs. Sullivan to work at all, but says that she did some extra work before his wife arrived, and that he paid the $10 which Sullivan claims was paid on his wages to her for such extra work.

The main question in the case is, to what extent is Mr. Sullivan bound by the arrangement which Mr. Copps made with the parties in Chicago. It is claimed on the part of the defendants that Mr. Copps represented his own interest and that of Mr. Sullivan in making the arrangement with the Chicago parties, and in regard to such arrangement as the agent of Mr. Sullivan, and the fact, which is undisputed, that Mr. Sullivan accepted the contract to the extent of retaining a one-eighth interest in the option, and selling it and realizing money upon it to Mr. Deiter, was a ratification of that contract, for the reason that, at the time he made his sale, he was then acquainted with the particulars of the...