McIntosh v. McKany & Carmichael Mercantile Co.
McIntosh v. McKany & Carmichael Mercantile Co.
Opinion of the Court
We do not agree with counsel for the plaintiffs in error in their contention that there is only a scintilla of evidence to support the allegations of the defendant in error’s complaint that they sold and delivered the goods in question to the plaintiffs in error at their special instance and request. On the contrary, there was substantial testimony introduced before the court and jury to sustain that contention, which satisfied both the court and jury. A part of that evidence is the testimony of the president of the plaintiff company, who testified, among other-things, substantially as follows:
That in January, 1907, he took the train at Whitehall to go to Butte, Mont., to see McIntosh, and was introduced to him on the train by Jennings, who was McIntosh Bros.’ superintendent of construction on the Milwaukee road; that during the conversation the witness told McIntosh that Ferine and Robinson, who were subcontractors under Or-man & Crook, were owing him a lot of money, which they had failed to pay; that McIntosh replied to the witness that any supplies that he furnished to Ferine and Robinson he furnished at his own risk, and that he should hiive an order from Orman & Crook, who were subcontractors under McIntosh Bros, on the Milwaukee road; that the plaintiff company did not then have an account with Orman & Crook, and that the witness told McIntosh that he would just as soon have Perine and Robinson owing him as Orman & Crook, as he had examined into their financial condition and found that it was poor; that McIntosh then told the witness that Orman & Crook had filed a -bond to protect
Jennings, McIntosh Bros.’ superintendent, testified, among other things, that he introduced McKany and McIntosh on the train to Butte, and sat in the seat immediately in front of them, when this conversation occurred, as near as he could remember:
“Mr. McKany said, ‘Mr. McIntosh, I have been furnishing Perine and Robinson a lot of goods on the Milwaukee grade,’ and Mr. McIntosh says, ‘Who is Perine and Robinson? And Mr. McKany said, “They are subcontractors under Orman & Crook,’ and he said, ‘Don’t know them at all.’ He said, ‘Any goods that you sell those people, or any of Orman & Crook’s subs, we will not be responsible for, and you will have to take your own chances, unless you have an order from Orman & Crook.’ I think I remember that Mr. McKany said he would just as lief have Perine and Robinson as Orman & Crook, and Mr. McIntosh said it didn’t make any' difference, that Orman & Crook were the head contractors, and they had furnished them the necessary bonds, and without their orders they would not be responsible for anything, and then he said, ‘Orman & Crook’s account will be good.’ Mr. McKany said, ‘How will I carry those accounts?’ And Mr. McIntosh says, ‘Carry them in the name of Or-man & Crook, and we will pay the bill.’ ”
Franks, a witness called on behalf of the plaintiff company, testified, among other things, that he was engaged in the butchering business, and was present at the Thornton Hotel in Butte about April, 1907, and heard the conversation between McIntosh and McKany; that the way he happened to be present was that he had been furnishing Orman & Crook with meat, and they had stopped paying him, and he came in to see McIntosh about the matter; that in that conversation McIntosh told McKany to go home and furnish merchandise, and for him (Franks) to furnish meat, and that he would pay the bill; that he was under a heavy bond to complete the work, and he did not want those camps broken up; that men were hard to get, and to go ahead and furnish the merchandise and the meat, and he would pay the bill; that he said that to McKany and himself, and he further said that the account should be carried in Orman & Crook’s name; that he had already taken part of the work from Orman & Crook, and that he would have to have meat and provisions on his own work, and they would have to have the same if they continued theirs, and to go ahead and furnish them, and he would pay the bills; that he (Franks) was present with McKany and McIntosh at the same place, about January, 1908, when McKany and himself had gone to try and get their money for the provisions that the plaintiff company had furnished and for meat that he had furnished, at which conversation McIntosh said that he was very busy with the time
This testimony certainly tended strongly to support the plaintiff’s contention that they sold the goods to McIntosh Bros, at their special instance and request. If, as the plaintiff’s testimony tended to show, and as the jury must have found, McIntosh Bros, authorized the plaintiff company to carry the account in the name of Orman & Crook, and to deliver the goods to them or on their order, it was none the less a sale and delivery to McIntosh Bros. The question of such a sale and delivery was the real issue in the case. It was submitted to the jury upon somewhat conflicting evidence, it is true, but in the light of instructions which-were full, correct and clear, and we see no good reason to interfere with the result.
The judgment is affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- McINTOSH v. McKANY & CARMICHAEL MERCANTILE CO.
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Sales (§ 355*) — Action fob Peice — Evidence of Sale and Deliveby of Goods. An allegation in a complaint that plaintiff sold and delivered goods to defendants at their special instance and request is supported by evidence that defendants were the general contractors for building a line of railroad, and that on defendants’ request, and on thoir promise to pay for the same, plaintiff furnished supplies to camps on the line of work on orders given by a firm of subcontractors, and charged the same to such firm, as directed by defendants. [Ed. Note. — ITor other cases, see Sales, Cent. Dig. §§ 1030, 1041: Dec. Dig. § 355.*]