Wilkinson v. Bethel

• Citation: 93 P. 27,13 Idaho 746
• Parties: GEORGE W. WILKINSON, Appellant, v. J. H. BETHEL, Respondent
• Decision Date: 18 December 1907
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Idaho

93 P. 27

13 Idaho 746

GEORGE W. WILKINSON, Appellant, v. J. H. BETHEL, Respondent

Supreme Court of Idaho

December 18, 1907

FINDINGS.

1. Under the conditions of the pleadings in this case; Held that the following findings of fact are sufficient to support a judgment of dismissal in favor of defendant: "That plaintiff did not purchase or pay for the 30,000 shares which plaintiff claims defendant holds in trust for him; that the allegations of plaintiff's complaint herein are not supported by the evidence and are untrue; that the allegations of defendant's affirmative defense are proven and true."

(Syllabus by the court.)

APPEAL from the District Court of Second Judicial District for Nez Perce County. Hon. Edgar C. Steele, Judge.

Action to declare a trust. Judgment of dismissal in favor of defendant. Plaintiff appealed. Affirmed.

Judgment affirmed with costs in favor of respondent.

John O Bender, for Appellant.

It has been held time and again that any finding which is not responsive to the issues made by the pleadings should be disregarded, and that such findings will in no way support or lend any support to the conclusions of law or the judgment in the case. (Marks v. Sayward, 50 Cal. 59.)

The material findings of fact made by the court are "that the plaintiff and his father paid the Ozark Mining and Milling Company, Limited, a corporation, $ 375 for stock and $ 125 on account of one G. A. Nehrhood; that the father William J. Wilkinson, received of said stock 50,000 shares and plaintiff 10,000 shares of said stock." These facts, together with the following admission in the answer, "Defendant admits that said corporation issued 40,000 shares of its capital stock to him" are sufficient to support a conclusion of law and judgment that the defendant holds said stock in trust for the plaintiff. Furthermore, these facts cover all of the issues under the pleadings and were the only facts which the court should have found. (Standley v. Flint, 10 Idaho 629, 79 P. 815.)

"Findings of fact that all the allegations of the complaint are true, and all the allegations of the answer, so far as they are inconsistent with the allegations of said complaint, are not true, are insufficient to support the judgment." (Krug v. Lux Brewing Co., 129 Cal. 322, 61 P. 1125; Bank of Woodland v. Treadwell, 55 Cal. 379.)

The findings should be responsive to all the material issues made by the pleadings and should cover all such issues. (Wood v. Broderson, 12 Idaho 190, 85 P. 490.)

Daniel Needham, for Respondent.

Appellant takes special exception to the general findings, to wit, "That the allegations of plaintiff's complaint are not supported by the evidence and are untrue," and cites Krug v. Lux Brewing Co., 129 Cal. 322, 61 P. 1125. In that case the court held that such a finding is sufficient, and cites Williams v. Hall, 79 Cal. 606, 21 P. 965. (See, also, Johnson v. Kline, 70 Cal. 186, 11 P. 606.)

In determining whether the findings of fact support the judgment, the findings must receive such construction as will uphold rather than defeat the judgment; and if, from the facts found, other facts may be inferred which support the judgment, it will be assumed that the trial court made the inferences. (Paine v. San Bernardino Valley Traction Co., 143 Cal. 654, 77 P. 659; Gardner v. Stare, 136 Cal. xix, 69 P. 426; Beardsley v. Clem, 137 Cal. 328, 70 P. 175.)

AILSHIE, C. J. Sullivan, J., concurs.

OPINION

AILSHIE, C. J.

This is an appeal from the judgment. The assignments of error go to the sufficiency of the findings to support the judgment. The only allegation in the complaint is as follows: "That on or about September 20, 1905, plaintiff purchased from the Ozark Mining and Milling Company, Limited, a corporation fifty thousand shares of its capital stock and paid the full purchase price therefor, two hundred and fifty dollars, and said corporation issued forty thousand shares of said stock to the defendant and said defendant still holds thirty thousand shares of said stock for the plaintiff." To this complaint defendant answered as follows: "Defendant denies that on or about September 20, 1905, plaintiff purchased from the Ozark Mining and Milling Company, Limited, a corporation, fifty thousand shares of its capital stock, or any other number of shares or at all, or that plaintiff paid the full...