Timberman v. Craddock

• Decision Date: 31 October 1879
• Citation: 70 Mo. 638
• Parties: TIMBERMAN et al., Plaintiffs in Error, v. CRADDOCK.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

70 Mo. 638

TIMBERMAN et al., Plaintiffs in Error,

v.CRADDOCK.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

October Term, 1879.

Error to Jackson Circuit Court.--HON. S. H. WOODSON, Judge.

REVERSED.

Stephen P. Twiss for plaintiffs in error, cited in argument Tyler v. Parr, 52 Mo. 249; Bell v. Kaiser, 50 Mo. 150; Woods v. Stephens, 46 Mo. 555.

F. M. Black for defendant in error.

HOUGH, J.

This was an a on an express contract, by which, as it was alleged, the defendant promised to pay to the plaintiffs, a real estate firm in the city of St. Louis, the sum of $1,000 for effecting an exchange of a stock of goods belonging to the defendant, for real property in Kansas City. Timberman, one of the plaintiffs, went with the defendant to Kansas City and remained with him there about eight days, boarding at the same hotel with him and occupying the same bed. There was testimony tending to show that it was agreed between Timberman and the defendant, before they left St. Louis, that the defendant was to pay to the plaintiffs $1,000 if any trade was made, and that defendant had frequently admitted his liability; that Timberman introduced the defendant to the firm of Smith & Green, real estate brokers at Kansas City, and the agents of St. Clair & Vincent who were the owners of the property for which the defendant exchanged his goods; that Timberman brought St. Clair to the office of Smith & Green to see the defendant, and sent word to Vincent, who was in Jasper county, requesting him to come to Kansas City; that while at Kansas City Timberman acted for the defendant and in his interest; that he had frequent conversations with St. Clair & Vincent, and also with their agents, Smith & Green, concerning the trade, and was present when it was consummated and the agreement of exchange was signed by Craddock and by St. Clair & Vincent. The testimony for the defendant tended to show that the agreement at St. Louis was, that he would give plaintiffs $1,000 if they would make a satisfactory exchange of his goods for certain real property in Kansas City, known as the Hill Mill property; that defendant and Timberman went to Kansas City, but failed to make said exchange, and that while there defendant himself negotiated a trade with St. Clair & Vincent, through Smith & Green, and that defendant at no time agreed to pay Timberman $1,000 on account of the exchange with Vincent & St. Clair.

At the request of the plaintiffs the court instructed the jury as follows: “If the evidence shows that on and...