Ritchie v. Huntington
Supreme Court of Kansas
Error from Shawnee District Court. Huntingdon sued Ritchie before a justice of the peace to recover the value of certain work done and performed under a special contract to be paid for in specific articles. The case was appealed to the district court, where the plaintiff recovered a judgment for the amount of his claim.
Read the full summary
Error from Shawnee District Court. Huntingdon sued Ritchie before a justice of the peace to recover the value of certain work done and performed under a special contract to be paid for in specific articles. The case was appealed to the district court, where the plaintiff recovered a judgment for the amount of his claim. Ritchie denied his liability to pay in money, and the question here is upon the sufficiency of the demand, and upon the instructions refused and those given by the court, both of which appear in the opinion. The defendant brings the case here on error. 1. Payment was to be…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Brewer, J.:
The action below •was one to recover for work. The performance of the work and the amount due were unquestioned. It appeared that payment was-to be made in rock, lime, and lumber, to be delivered when demanded at any place in the city of Topeka, or Ritchie’s Addition. Plaintiff below, defendant in error,, testified that he demanded payment and was refused. This is the language of the record: “I then asked him if' he would give me some lumber; he said, not a foot.’7' Nothing was ever delivered or paid.
*252Upon this testimony the defendant below…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Blood v. GoodrichNew York Supreme Court · 1832
- Dunlap v. HuntingNew York Supreme Court · 1846
- Corbitt ex rel. Alvord v. StonemetzWisconsin Supreme Court · 1862
- Hamilton v. MatlockIndiana Supreme Court · 1864