Briggs v. Barnett

• Decision Date: 13 June 1907
• Citation: 108 Va. 404,61 S.E. 797
• Parties: BRIGGS et al. v. BARNETT et al.
• Court: Virginia Supreme Court

108 Va. 404

61 S.E. 797

BRIGGS et al.

v.BARNETT et al.

Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia.

June 13, 1907.

On Rehearing. June 11, 1908.

1. Shipping—Part Owners—Title—Nature.

Four individuals became the owners of a vessel lying aground, each holding a one-fourth undivided interest therein, and they determined to make an effort to float the ship, and entered into an agreement placing the work in the hands of one of them, each to pay his one-fourth of the expenses incurred in the venture. Held, that they were tenants in common of the vessel, and were not partners.

[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 44, Shipping, § 72.]

2. Same—Mutual Liability.

Four individuals owning a vessel as tenants in common agreed that one of them should undertake the work of floating the vessel, each to contribute one-fourth of the cost. The individual designated to do the work performed services in the venture. Held, that he was entitled to reasonable compensation, though there was no express contract therefor.

3. Work and Labor—Rendition and Acceptance of Services.

Where one renders services for another at the latter's request, the law, in the absence of an express agreement, implies a promise to pay what the services are reasonably worth, unless it can be inferred from the circumstances that the services were to be rendered without compensation.

[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 50, Work and Labor, §§ 3, 4.]

4. Shipping — Part Owners—Repairs—Mutual Liability.

Four individuals owning as tenants in common a vessel lying aground determined to attempt to float her, and agreed that each should pay his fourth of the expenses incurred and designated one of them to do the work; he agreeing to send his barge to assist in the work. In the event of a loss, each agreed to be liable for one-fourth. The agreement included boiler and hoister and other gear as might be necessary for the work. Held, that the individual in charge of the work was properly allowed to charge the others with a boiler and engine, and other articles belonging to him and used in the work.

[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 44, Shipping, § 67.]

5. Same.

Four individuals owning as tenants in common a vessel lying aground contracted to float the same; each agreeing to pay one-fourth of the expenses incurred. Each owned an undivided one-fourth interest in the vessel. Oneroid one-half of his interest to a third person, who knew what efforts were being made to float the vessel, and made no objection thereto. Held, that the third person was responsible for an eighth of the expenses after he became interested in the venture.

6. Same.

The powers and rights of co-tenants of ships are in general essentially the same as in the case of other tenants in common in any other chattel.

[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 44, Shipping, §§ 61-72.]

7. Same—Liability of Owners for Expenditures.

Where a ship's husband, who is the common agent of all the owners, is not a part owner, all the owners are responsible for the joint expenditures and charges, in the absence of special contract; but, where the husband is part owner, each is liable only for his own share of such expenditures and charges.

8. Same—Joint or Several Liability.

Four individuals owning as tenants in common a vessel lying aground agreed to attempt to float the vessel, and contracted to leave the work in the hands of one of them, each to pay one-fourth of the expenses incurred in the venture. They each owned an undivided one-fourth interest in the vessel. Held, that the undertak-ing of the tenants in common was several, and not joint, nor joint and several.

9. Same.

Individuals owning as tenants in common a vessel aground, who agreed to attempt to float her, each to pay one-fourth of the expenses incurred by one of them intrusted with the work, were under no obligation to pay more than their own respective shares of the expenses for the work.

10. Payment—Recovery.

Four individuals owning a vessel as tenants in common, each holding an undivided one-fourth interest, agreed to make an effort to float the vessel, each to pay one-fourth of the expenses incurred. One of the tenants was intrusted with the work, and was entitled to compensation for the services rendered. Two of the co-tenants made payments to him on account of sums due from the remaining co-tenant and a third person, who had purchased a half of the remaining co-tenant's interest. Held, that the payments, if voluntarily made, were not recoverable either at law or in equity.

[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 39, Payment, §§ 253-266.]

11. Money Paid—Voluntary Payment—Recovery.

An action of assumpsit does not lie for money voluntarily paid for another, for no assumpsit is raised by the mere voluntary payment of the debt of another.

[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 35, Money Paid, § 13.]

12. Contribution — Grounds of — Obligation.

Where parties are severally bound for a specific portion of a debt as principal, and one pays more than he is bound for, he is not entitled to contribution from the others for such excess, for the essence of contribution is that there shall be a joint liability or a joint and several liability.

[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 11, Contribution, § 2.]

13. Same—Enforcement—Nature and Form of Remedy—Equity—Remedy at Law.

Where one jointly liable for a debt pays more than his share, and is entitled in consequence thereof to compel the other joint obligors to make contribution, the contribution may be enforced in a suit in equity, though ample remedy at law exists.

On Rehearing.

14. Shipping—Liabilities of Owners—Supplies—Home Port.

Individuals residing in a city owned as tenants in common a vessel lying aground a few miles from the city and within easy and constant access. They agreed that one of them should undertake the work to float her, each to contribute one-fourth of the cost thereof. No one was clothed with the general authority of a master, nor with a special authority of a ship's husband or agent. Held, that the vessel was in the home port within the rule that the managing owner of a vessel in the home port cannot by virtue of that relation alone bind the co-owners to a personal liability for supplies.

[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 44, Shipping, § 67.]

15. Same.

Plaintiffs and defendant B. and a third person were the owners as tenants in common of a vessel lying aground in the home port. Each owned a fourth interest. They agreed to attempt to float the vessel, the third person to undertake the work, and each to pay a fourth interest of the expenses incurred. B. notified plaintiffs and the third person that he did not intend to be at any further expense with re spect to the vessel, though, if plaintiffs and the third person saw proper to make further expenditures, his interest should remain in him in the proportion the money paid in by him bore to the actual cost of floating the ship. B. sold a half of his interest to C. B., after giving the notice, took an interest in the efforts to float the vessel, and refused to part with his interest in her because of the expectation that she would be speedily floated. Held, that B. and C. were not liable to plaintiffs and the third person for the expenses incurred after such notice on the ground of implied agency.

Appeal from Court of Law and Chancery of City of Norfolk.

Suit by Charles M. Barnett and another against George S. Briggs and others. From a decree for complainants, defendants appeal. Reversed and remanded.

W. D. Pender and Jeffries, Wolcott & Wolcott, for appellants.

W. L. Williams, for appellees.

BUCHANAN, J. This is a suit for contribution instituted by Charles M. Barnett and George Twohy against George S. Briggs, Vincent Cacace, and W. C. Cobb. The record shows that in March, 1904, the parties to the suit, except Cobb, became the owners of a ship known as the "Henry B. Hyde, " with her cargo, which was lying aground in the Atlantic Ocean near Virginia Beach, each holding an one-fourth undivided interest therein. They determined to make an effort to float the ship, and entered into a contract which was partly in writing and partly oral for that purpose. The agreement, so far as it was evidenced by a writing, is as follows:

"The following agreement is hereby entered into between the undersigned owners of the ship Henry B. Hyde as she lies on the beach near Dam Neck Life Saving Station, Va.:

"That we will leave the matter of stripping and floating directly in the hands of Vincent Cacace, it being understood that he will make all negotiations and do the best for all concerned.

"It is further understood that he will send his barge, Joseph, down to the wreck to assist in the work, valuing the barge at $4,000. He is unable to secure insurance and it is understood, in the event of a loss, that each of the owners will be liable for one-fourth.

"The same will apply to the gear put aboard, including boiler and hoister and such other gear as it may be necessary for him to put."

The owners further agreed verbally that each of them, including Cacace, would advance or pay his one-fourth of the costs or expenses incurred in the venture. Subsequently W. C. Cobb purchased one-half of Briggs' interest in the vessel.

Cacace took charge of the work in March, 1904, and the work was continued until October of that year, when the effort to float was abandoned, the vessel was stripped, and the machinery and implements purchased and used in the work sold. The proceeds of thosesales were applied to the payment of the expenses incurred in the effort to float the vessel, as were also the sums paid or advanced by the owners during the progress of the work.

The bill alleges that Cacace, Barnett, and Twohy each paid his one-fourth of the expenses incurred, but that Briggs and Cobb only paid in part what was due from them, and that this balance due from them was advanced by Barnett and...