Stiritz v. Big Muddy Mining Co.

100 N.E. 968, 257 Ill. 543
CourtIllinois Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 20, 1913
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 100 N.E. 968 (Stiritz v. Big Muddy Mining Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Illinois Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Stiritz v. Big Muddy Mining Co., 100 N.E. 968, 257 Ill. 543 (Ill. 1913).

Opinion

Mr. Justice Cooicb

delivered the opinion of the court:

Appellants, A. C. Stiritz and Antonia Stiritz, his wife, instituted an action of ejectment in the circuit court of Williamson county against the Big Muddy Mining Company, the Cambria Coal Company, and other defendants who were merely nominal parties, to recover the coal and mineral rights and certain surface rights in 340 acres of land in Williamson county. A trial' was had before the court without a jury and resulted in a judgment in favor of the defendants and against the plaintiffs for costs of suit. From that judgment the appellants have appealed to this court.

The controversy in the case arises out of the execution by appellants of two mining leases or grants, one executed on May 11, 1904, and the other dated November 19, 1906, but executed by appellants on March 11, 1907. On May 11, 1904, appellants were the owners in fee simple of the 340 acres of land in question. On that date they executed and delivered to John Colp and C. A. Gent a mining lease, of unlimited duration, for all the coal underlying said land that could be economically mined, together with certain surface rights to be used in connection with the mining of coal on the premises. By the terms of this lease Colp and Gent agreed to pay to the lessors a royalty of two cents per ton on all coal mined, and the lease provided that thirty days’ default in the payment of royalty, after written demand therefor, should forfeit all rights of the lessees in the premises. Provision was also made for the payment, after the first year, of a fixed sum as advance royalty to the lessors until mining operations should be commenced, and the lessees agreed to begin sinking a shaft or building a railroad track within twelve months. Thereafter litigation arose between appellants and Colp and Gent, in which appellants attacked the validity of the lease last mentioned. This resulted in the entry of a decree by the circuit court of Williamson county on October 14, 1905, holding the lease valid and binding upon appellants. Shortly afterwards, and on December 13, 1905, Colp and Gent by a written instrument assigned said lease and conveyed all their rights and interests in the premises to appellee the Big Muddy Mining Company, the consideration for this' assignment being the assumption by the mining company of all obligations imposed on Colp and Gent by the terms of this lease, and the payment to them of an additional royalty of three cents per ton on all coal taken from the premises.

The Big Muddy Mining Company was organized and incorporated by A. B. McLaren, W. O. Potter and Potter’s wife. During January, 1906, these parties sold to D. E. Notley, of Cherry Tree, Pennsylvania, all the stock of the corporation, and assigned to him all except two shares of the stock, Potter and McLaren each nominally retaining one share. These three persons thereafter composed the board of directors of the company, and Notley became president, McLaren vice-president and Potter secretary of the company. On August 23, 1906, Notley entered into a written agreement with J. L. Mitchell, David Orr, and others, whereby, after reciting that he was then the owner of all the stock of the Big Muddy Mining Company, he agreed to turn over to Mitchell and the other parties to the contract, or to a corporation to be formed and incorporated by them, all the stock of the Big Muddy Mining Company upon receiving a note for a certain sum, executed by the corporation to be formed and endorsed by the individual incorporators. The agreement provided that Mitchell should be the first president of the new corporation. During the latter part of the month of September following, David Orr, on behalf of the parties who were to organize the new corporation, took charge of the premises in question and expended about $35,000 furnished him by those parties, in developing the coal mining rights. The corporation which was, under the agreement with Notley, to be formed by these parties was not incorporated until May 23, 1907, when it was organized under the laws of this State under the corporate name of “The Cambria Coal Company,” and the property has since been operated by that company.

After assuming the management of the property, Orr, some time prior to November 19, 1906, learned of the litigation between appellants and Colp and Gent, which had resulted in a decree, on October 14, 1905, upholding the validity of the lease, and was informed that Stiritz was still insisting that the lease was void and was threatening to take the case to a higher court for review. He thereupon entered into negotiations with Stiritz for a new lease providing for a royalty to the lessors of three cents per ton on all coal mined. Stiritz did not at that time know that Colp and Gent had assigned the lease of May 11, 1904, to the Big Muddy Mining Company, and Orr did not advise him of that fact. Stiritz refused to make a new lease unless it was made subject to the Colp and Gent lease, and it seems to have been Orr’s purpose to obtain a lease which would become effective only in case the Colp and Gent lease should be held void upon appeal or writ of error. About November 19, 1906, Stiritz and Orr called upon an attorney and directed him to prepare a new lease from appellants to the Big Muddy Mining Company. Orr testified ■ that the provisions of this lease were dictated to the attorney by Stiritz and that he (Orr) did not remain in the attorney’s office during all the time the lease was being prepared. After the lease, which was in duplicate, had been prepared by the attorney, both copies were taken by Orr, who on the same day, and without reading the same, mailed them to Notley. The latter kept them for some considerable time and until Orr had occasion to malee a trip to Pittsburg. Upon his arrival at Pittsburg, Orr telephoned Notley at his home in Cherry Tree and requested Notley to meet him in Pittsburg. Notley went to Pittsburg, taking the instruments with him, and, without ever having read the same, signed one copy as president of the Big Muddy Mining Company, and gave this copy, together with the one which he did not sign, to Orr, and directed the latter to submit them to Mitchell and to the attorney representing the parties who were then developing the property, and if they approved them, to have Potter, as secretary of the Big Muddy Mining Company, sign the copy which he (Notley) had signed as president of that company and affix the corporate seal of the company thereto. Instead of following these instructions, Orr, upon his return, and without submitting them to Mitchell or to the attorney designated by Notley, left both copies with the cashier of a bank at Johnston City, who was a notary, and requested him to have appellants sign and acknowledge the lease. On March n, 1907, appellants signed and acknowledged both copies of the lease at the bank, and the notary thereupon delivered them to appellants, who a short time thereafter delivered to Orr the copy which was signed only by appellants and retained the copy which had been signed by Notley. Orr testifies that when Stiritz came to- his hotel and handed him one copy of the lease, he (Orr) told Stiritz that he ought to have both copies, as neither had yet been fully executed. Stiritz denies this conversation, and says that when he told Orr he was keeping one copy, Orr replied, “It is all right.”

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

Related

Carter v. Miller
260 N.W. 393 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1935)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
100 N.E. 968, 257 Ill. 543, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stiritz-v-big-muddy-mining-co-ill-1913.