Case ID: miss_28/html/0090-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Fisher", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Abner Robertson vs. A. D. Wells.
    Where R. and W. disputed as to what sum should be paid W. on account of a breach of contract on the part of R., and the matter was referred to arbitrators who agreed that R. should pay W. $19 per month dating from a certain time, but in computing the time, the arbitrators made a mistake and gave W. too much, and a note was executed for the amount ascertained by the arbitrators to be due by R. to W., and suit was brought on it: Held, that it was competent for the court, upon a proper showing, to correct the mistake in the calculation of the arbitrators, for which amount the note was given.
    IN error from the circuit court of Calhoun county; Hon.
    Lock E. Houston, judge.
    
      Robertson and Williamson disputed about the length of time and the price of labor which the latter had performed for the former, when the matter in controversy was by them referred to arbitrators, who agreed to allow Williamson $19 per month for the labor he had performed for Robertson, and computed the time at six months. Robertson executed his note to Wells at Williamson’s request, for labor, according to a calculation of that period of time; but subsequently it was discovered that Williamson had only performed services for four months and twenty-two days.
    Wells sued Robertson on the note, who offered to prove and did prove that the note was given for too much, according to the calculation of the arbitrators; but the jury rendered a verdict for the whole amount of the note.
    Robertson moved the court for a new trial, which was refused by the court, when he prayed a writ of error to this court.
    
      JEvans and Inge, for appellant.
    Wharton, for appellee.
   Mr. Justice Fisher

delivered the opinion of the court.

This was a suit in the circuit court of Calhoun county, founded upon the note of the defendant below to the plaintiff.

The facts are as follows : One Williamson and the defendant Robertson, had a dispute as to what sum should be paid to Williamson, on account of a breach of a certain contract on the part of Robertson. The plaintiff below and one Pass were selected as arbitrators, and agreed between themselves that Robertson should pay Williamson $19 per month from the 1st of January till some time in May following, when Williamson quit the employment of Robertson. In computing the time, the arbitrators made a mistake, computing it as six months, whereas it was only four months and some days.

The question is whether this mistake ought to be corrected. To this question there can be but one answer, and that is, whether the proof is clear that the mistake was made. Pass, the only witness who was really disinterested on the trial below, proves the facts as above stated.

Judgment reversed, new trial granted, and cause remanded.