Connolly

Connolly v. Lost Horse Mining & Milling Co.

Good Law
1906 Cal. App. LEXIS 211·3 Cal. App. 79·84 P. 445
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 12, 1906Civ. No. 144.California368 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Gray, J.

In this case the plaintiff, after a trial before the court without a jury, obtained a judgment against T. C. Ryan and Jepp Ryan for the sum of $533.75, balance due him for work and labor in looking after a mine that was not in operation, and in taking care of about one hundred head of cattle, horses and mules, drawing water for the same with a bucket and windlass out of a well ninety feet deep. The defendants, the Ryans, appeal from an order denying them a new trial.

The only point urged as ground for reversal is that the finding to the effect that the services were performed for the appellants, and that there was due and unpaid the plaintiff from appellants the amount for which judgment was given, is not sustained by the evidence. But we think this contention cannot be upheld. The appellants, T. C. Ryan and Jepp Ryan, as clearly appears from the evidence, were doing business together in some capacity under the name of “Ryan Bros.” Part of plaintiff’s wages while doing the work in question were paid with orders drawn by plaintiff upon “Ryan Bros.” in favor of third parties. Some of these orders were paid by cheeks drawn on a bank and signed “Ryan Bros.,” and both the orders…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.