DocketNumber: No. 8804
Judges: Rudkin
Filed Date: 11/30/1910
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/16/2024
On the 9th day of September, 1908, the plaintiff and defendant entered into a written contract, whereby the plaintiff agreed to drive a rock tunnel in a certain coal mine or claim, owned by the defendant in Clallam county. The tunnel was to be driven 500 feet, more or less, as the defendant might direct, at a cost of $14 per lineal yard. At the time of the execution of the contract the plaintiff deposited with the defendant the sum of $300 to secure its faithful performance according to its terms. Work commenced under the contract in October, 1908, and was abandoned by direction of the defendant in February, 1909. The present action was instituted to recover the $300 deposited as security, and the further sum of $55.75, for services performed by the plaintiff as a coal miner, under a separate contract. The answer consisted of denials, and a counterclaim in favor of defendant in the sum of $15.05 in excess of the several amounts claimed by the plaintiff. The case was tried before a jury, and from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff in the sum of $344.60, the defendant has appealed.
The principal assignment of error, and the only one we feel called upon to consider, is the insufficiency of the evidence to justify the verdict and judgment. This assignment must be sustained. Under the testimony, the respondent claimed credit for the following items: Amount of deposit $300; driving 137 yards of tunnel, at $14 per yard, $1,918; labor claim, mentioned in the second cause of action, $55.75. The first and third items are not disputed, but the second is not established by any competent testimony. The respondent bases his claim for 137 yards of tunnel construction on certain monthly statements furnished by the superintendent of the appellant company, who was confessedly a secret partner of the respondent in this undertaking. The respondent offered no other testimony as to the length of tunnel driven by
The judgment of the court below is therefore reversed, with directions to dismiss the respondent’s complaint, and enter judgment in favor of the appellant in accordance with the prayer of its counterclaim.
Fullerton, Gose, Mount, and Parker, JJ., concur.