Chicago & Canada Southern R'y Co. v. Peters

8 N.W. 584, 45 Mich. 636, 1881 Mich. LEXIS 794
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedApril 13, 1881
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 8 N.W. 584 (Chicago & Canada Southern R'y Co. v. Peters) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Chicago & Canada Southern R'y Co. v. Peters, 8 N.W. 584, 45 Mich. 636, 1881 Mich. LEXIS 794 (Mich. 1881).

Opinion

Graves, J.

Peters having recovered before a justice of the peace in a suit brought on an account stated and the judgment having been affirmed on certiorari the company has brought error. The point of primary importance under the objections taken is whether any substantial part of the cause of action was wholly destitute of proof. Because if such was the case the judgment has no foundation and should be reversed. Cicotte v. Morse 8 Mich. 424. The question is fairly presented by the record, because the justice certifies that his return contains all the testimony. The evidence tended to show that some person drawing ties to the railway left the fence down and that several sheep belonging to Peters passed through and were killed by a train on the company’s road. There was likewise evidence that three persons appraised the value of the sheep. No proof was given to fix negligence on either party.

The theory on which the judgment is supported is that the persons who agreed upon the value were appointed by the parties for that purpose and were in fact arbitrators, and that their finding was the act of the parties. It is a sufficient reply to this idea to say that the record does not bear it out. There is no evidence whatever that the railway company became a party to the proceedings to ascertain the value of the sheep. There is not a scintilla of proof that it took any part in the choice of the persons spoken of as appraisers, or in any way recognized them as authorized to bind it by anything they might do. For all that appears they acted solely at the instance of Peters and not at all in character of umpires mutually agreed on. The case therefore fails on the only ground attempted to be. urged in its defence.

The judgment below must be reversed and the company will recover its costs in all the courts.

The other Justices concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Foster v. Watson
117 N.W. 197 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1908)
Bullock v. Ueberroth
80 N.W. 39 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1899)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
8 N.W. 584, 45 Mich. 636, 1881 Mich. LEXIS 794, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chicago-canada-southern-ry-co-v-peters-mich-1881.