Howard v. Norton-Morgan Commercial Co.
Howard v. Norton-Morgan Commercial Co.
Opinion of the Court
— The Norton-Morgan Commercial Company brought this action as assignee of John IT. Norton & Company, to recover from J. J. Howard and George Baum the sum of $640.12, the value of goods, wares and merchandise alleged to have been sold and delivered by John H. Norton & Co. to J. J. Howard, at the instance and request of Baum and Howard. It is alleged that at the time the goods were so sold and delivered Howard and Baum were engaged as partners in developing and working certain mines, and that the goods were used by Howard in and about the development and working of those mines. The defendants, for answer, deny that they were partners in the development and working of the mines, or that the goods were used in or about the development and working of the mines, or that the goods were furnished at the instance and request of Baum. It is alleged that the goods were sold and delivered to Howard and that they were for his individual use. A counterclaim was set up by Howard for the value of certain ores delivered by him to John IT. Norton & Co. A jury trial resulted in a verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $500.
The first assignment of error is that the court erred in permitting plaintiff to amend its complaint during the progress of the trial. The amendment was made without objection and therefore may not now be complained of. The other assignments of error, except the ninth, allege error because of the failure of the court to instruct the jury in certain particulars. The record does not disclose that any request whatever was made of the court in connection with its instructions to the jury.
In the ninth and last assignment, it is contended that the verdict and judgment are contrary to the law and evidence. The basis of this contention is an agreement between John H. Norton & Co. and Howard and Baum, executed November 24, 1902. This agreement recites: “That, whereas, John H. Norton & Company have agreed to secure a deed from H. J. Clifford for an undivided two-thirds interest in and to the following described property; . . . Now, therefore, in consideration of that the said John H. Norton & Company
The judgment is affirmed.
KENT, C. J., and SLOAN and NAVE, JJ., concur.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- JOHN J. HOWARD and GEORGE RAUM, and in Error v. NORTON-MORGAN COMMERCIAL COMPANY, a Corporation, and in Error
- Cited By
- 2 cases
- Status
- Published