Kalkman v. Baylis
Kalkman v. Baylis
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the Court—Cope, C. J. and Crocker, J. concurring.
In the complaint, the plaintiffs for the first cause of action, set forth a special agreement for the building of a warehouse by them for the defendants, and aver a performance on their part. For a second cause of action, they aver the performance of certain extra work on the said building. For a third cause of action, they aver that the defendants were, on a day specified, indebted to them in the sum of $1,360 for work and labor done, and materials furnished in the building of a warehouse, at the defendants’ request, of which sum two hundred and fifty dollars have been paid, and that there is now due the sum of $1,110. The complaint is verified. A motion made to strike the third cause of action from the complaint was denied. The answer denies, specifically, all the allegations relating to the first and second causes of action. It then denies that the defendants are indebted to the 'plaintiffs in the sum of $1,110, or any other sum. This denial is not applied in explicit terms to the third cause of action; but that is the only one in which that sum was claimed to be due. After the answer was filed, the parties stipulated that a referee be appointed to take and report the evidence; and that the case be tried upon such evidence. The evidence was taken and reported to the Court, and the action tried, as is stated in the finding, “ upon the pleadings and upon the evidence reported ” by the referee. In its finding the Court says it “ finds from the admission in said pleadings from the failure of the defendants to answer the third count in the plaintiffs’ complaint, the following facts, to witand then proceeds to set forth as facts found the matters which are alleged in that third count. From the judgment entered upon this finding, the defendants appeal.
Judgment reversed, and cause remanded, and a new trial ordered.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- KALKMAN v. BAYLIS
- Cited By
- 2 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- The complaint contained three counts. The first, on a special contract for the erection of a warehouse; the second, for extra work on the building; and the third, for work and labor done, and materials furnished in its erection. The answer denied the allegations of the first two counts; but failed to deny the allegations of the third. The parties stipulated that the evidence should be taken by a referee, and the cause tried before the Court on the evidence. The Court, instead of finding the facts from the evidence, found the allegations of the third count' correct, becaus6 not denied. Held, that this was error, and that the Court should have regarded the allegations of the third count as denied, and found the facts from the evidence.