The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-03-14
STATE SUPREME COURT
Two Montana Central Cases
Were Reversed.
ERRORS IN INSTRUCTIONS
Cows We're Rated at More Than Their
Market Value in a jefferson County
Case-Important Points Passed
On by the Court.


Special Dispatch to the Standard
Helena, March 13.-The supreme court
passed upon two appeals to-day. in
each of which the Montana Central was
defendant. Both were reversed. l..
Parrin VS.. the Montana Central was
appealed from the district court of JEFF
terson county, where Parrin secured Il
verdict for s11O for some mich cows
and a team of mares that We're killed
by the railroad. The court. in a per
curiam, reverses the case because of
an error in the instructions of the lower
court in telling the jury that in estimat-
ing Parrins damages the jury had
right to take into consideration the fact
that the stock killed had been used by
the plaintiff in his dairy business.
Speaking of this error, the court says;
Although the fact that the COWS We're
dairy stock was relevant as to value,
the business of plaintiff was not one of
the facts proper to be considered in de-
termining their value. Plaintiff was
entitled to a verdict for a sum equal
to the market value of the cattle and
no more"
The other case decided was Daniel P
Workman vs. the Montana Central, an
action for damages for breach of con-
tract This case has been in the courts
three or four years and was tried in the
district court of this county. There are
a number of important points passed
| upon by the court in it's opinion by the
chief justice, the opinion being long.
| Workman sued the company for $4,000
damages and secured a verdict for
$l5500. He had a contract with the
company for lining the Wickes tunnel
with stone. After he had partially COM
pleted the contract the company took
the work from him and completed it
itself, claiming that he was not per-
forming the work in accordance with
the company's desires. There was
clause in the contract that gave the
chief engineer of the road power to ter
inmate the contract whenever he saw
fit, because of any neglect of the work
| on Wortmans part. This made the
! engineer a final judge. In discussing
| that clause OF the contract, the court
! holds that it was not binding.
1T Is now the well settled doctrine
| by the great weight of authorities that
| parties cannot stipulate ybaforehand to
| submit their rights generally to the.
| judgment of a designated third person
| for final determination" says the court.
| 'The effect of such stipulation is to
| oust the courts of their jurisdiction and
to restrict the parties from enforcing
their rights under the contract by the
| usual legal proceedings in the ordin
ary tribunals. We do not find in the
| contract any ground for the assumption
| by defendant that it had any option to
| abandon the enterprise at any time
| without reference to the rights of the
defendant. 1t did not belong to the
umpire to cOnstrue the contract and
in the absence of a strained construc
ton we cannot find this option"
,,,,1 -f tl,.N tt, l, To-
court the company had moved for IA
suit on the ground that the show
ing made by the plaintiff on trial cid
not support the allegation of his com
plaint: that the defendant had stop
ped work temporarily and wrongfully
refused to resume it again. This the
court denied The supreme court finds
that this motion should have been
granted. A large part of the opinion
is devoted to discussing the contract.
the points given above and the instruc-
tions of the lower court.
Although the case is reversed and
sent back for new trial. the court
grants Workman permission to amend
| his complaint in conformity with the
| suggestions contained in the opinion
| Samuel McMurran, who was appoint
| ed marshal of the supreme court in the
| early part of last year, has resigned
| and his successor appointed. After an
| nouncng the two opinions to-day Chief
| Justice Brantly stated that the court
| had received Marshal McMurrans res
| ignation, which, after due considera-
| ton the court had decided to accept
| with regret. The chief justice paid the
| retiring marshal a very nice compli-
ment. saying that he had made an
efficient officer performing his duties
| in a very satisfactory manner and at
| all times being attentive and polite.
In conclusion the chief justice said the
/ court had decided to appoint Oliver T.
| Crane of Helena. The appointment will
! take effect April l. The new marshal
| is a lawyer by profession and is of the
| republican faith