Rauh v. Oliver
Idaho Supreme Court
APPEAL from District Court of Idaho County. Honorable Edgar C. Steele, Judge. Action to recover for services on a mail contract. Judgment for defendant. The facts are stated in tbe opinion. The demurrer to the third, fourth and fifth separate defenses should have been sustained. (Fidelity Nat.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from District Court of Idaho County. Honorable Edgar C. Steele, Judge. Action to recover for services on a mail contract. Judgment for defendant. The facts are stated in tbe opinion. The demurrer to the third, fourth and fifth separate defenses should have been sustained. (Fidelity Nat. Bank of Spokane v. Henley, 34 Wash. 1, 63 Pac. 1119; Bradley v. Boot, 5 Paige (N. Y.), 633.) While the testimony of the appellant to the effect that he was employed by the respondent was probably not correct, according to the commonly accepted meaning of the word “employed/’ it was still within the…
1Opinion of the Court
SULLIVAN, C. J. —
This is an action to recover for carrying United States mail from Mt. Idaho to Florence, Idaho. It is alleged in the complaint that in December, 1898, one Hols-claw entered into a contract with the United States, wherein he ¡contracted to carry the United States mail between Grangeville, Idaho, and Florence, Idaho, as a subcontractor, under what was Imown as the Underwood mail contract, and that the respondent 'Oliver was one of said Holsclaw’s sureties for the faithful performance of the duties imposed by said contract; that in August, 1899, said Holsclaw failed to comply…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cited by20 opinions
- Bethlahmy v. BechtelIdaho Supreme Court · 1966
- Wheeler v. Oregon Railroad & Navigation Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1909
- Clark v. OlsenIdaho Supreme Court · 1986
- Stone v. BradshawIdaho Supreme Court · 1942
- Schlieff v. BistlineIdaho Supreme Court · 1932
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.