21 S.D. 173 | S.D. | 1906
During the year 1904, plaintiff and a number of men in his employ -excavated a shaft for the corporate defendant, then engaged in prospecting for coal, and this action was instituted to recover $1,000 as the reasonable value of such labor and pursuant to an alleged oral agreement entered into by the par
Under the written contract respondent undertook to sink and curb a shaft 7 by II feet to the depth of 80 feet, or to a coal bed, at the option of appellant. He was to have the free use of all the company’s machinery and tools then upon the premises where the work was to be performed, and was to be provided with the lumber required for curbing the shaft, together with suitable board for the men and all necessary fuel for operating the machinery. At the time of making the written contract it appears that some work had been done upon this shaft, for the completion of which respondent was to receive $1,000, and, in the event it became necessary to abandon the same, he was to- fill the excavation after removing all lumber and other materials -which were to be used in the construction of another shaft for which- appellant agreed to pay him $1,200. -After respondent and the men in his employ had labored for considerably more than a month and had sunk the shaft about 35 feet a great mass of quicksand and water was encountered rendering it impossible to- proceed with the work. He promptly reported this condition to- appellant company at a meeting of its directors held on the 20th of October, 1904, at the office of its president, W. G. Wells, who appears to have been fully authorized to- act for the corporation in all matters pertaining to the development \york under consideration. At this meeting Mr. Wells and one of the directors, F. B. Gannon, were delegated to visit the mine with an expert on the following day for the purpose of determining what, if anything, could be done in sinking a smaller hole from the bottom of the abandoned shaft.
Concerning what was said and done thereafter plaintiff testified in part as follows: “Mr. Wells and Mr. Gannon visited the well the next day. They brought an expert with them. I am acquainted with W. G. Wells. Mr. Wells did all the corresponding
The foregoing testimony is fully corroborated in most particulars, and it is conceded that all the persons mentioned by respondent in his testimony • were officers and directors of appellant company. Mr. Wells testified that, in making the oral contract in question he acted as the representative of the corporation. As the shaft was not sunk 80 feet nof to the vein of coal reached by the use .of the auger, respondent very . properly introduced testi
That the written contract was mutually abandoned and entirely superseded by the oral agreement stands proved by the undisputed evidence, and the authority of the officers to bind the corporation to the terms of the latter is the only question remaining for consideration. The claim of counsel for appellant that the corporation never empowered its board of directors to authorize Mr. Wells to make such agreement with respondent receives no support from the record. It was sufficiently shown that, when respondent made his report October 20, 1904, at a meeting of the corporation, and declared his inability to proceed with the large hoisting shaft on account of the quicksand and water encountered,
As no errors of law occurred at the trial, either in the admission of evidence or in submitting the same to the jury, the reasons urged for a reversal are not sustainable, and the judgment appealed’ from is affirmed.