A. C. Seavey And Sons v. Godbold
| Decision Date | 06 March 1911 |
| Citation | 54 So. 838,99 Miss. 113 |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
| Parties | A. C. SEAVEY AND SONS v. J. I. GODBOLD |
October 1910
APPEAL from the circuit court of Lincoln county, HON. D. M. MILLER Judge.
Suit by J. I. Godbold against A. C. Seavey and Sons et al. From a judgment for plaintiff defendant appeals.
The facts as shown by the record are: That one Joe Keene rented land from appellee, Godbold, for the sum of one hundred dollars. It seems that he brought four bales of cotton to market, two of which were claimed to have been raised by his son, Luther Keene, on the land rented from appellee. The Keenes, Joe and Luther, met Godbold in the city of Brookhaven, in compliance with a letter written by Godbold to Joe Keene, and brought the cotton with them. With Godbold's consent, the Keenes took samples of the cotton to several merchants. and finally sold same to appellants. Appellants paid Luther Keene for two bales, and at Joe Keene's instance paid appellee one hundred dollars for the rent. At the time of the settlement, appellee made no demand for the cotton sold by Luther Keene, nor did he assert any claim to it because of any lien. It appears from the record that Godbold had advanced certain supplies to Joe Keene, amounting to eighty-four dollars and ninety-five cents, which amount he demanded of Luther Keene out of the proceeds of the sale of his cotton, and, being refused instituted suit against Joe Keene and the Seaveys. There was a judgment in favor of the appellee against appellants and Keene, from which this appeal is taken. At the time the cotton was sold to appellants, no notice was given appellants that appellee claimed a lien for supplies on the two bales claimed as the cotton of Luther Keene and for which appellants paid Luther Keene. It is the contention here of appellants that the actions of Godbold amounted to a waiver of any lien thereon, since they permitted the Keenes to market the cotton and receive payment therefor without objection.
Reversed and remanded.
A. C. & G. W. McNair, for appellants.
It will be noted especially that Godbold, the landlord, permitted both Luther and Joe Keene to make the sales of all the cotton on which he claimed a lien, and knew that Joe and Luther Keene were operating together and that they were selling together; still, when the settlement was made with Seavey & Sons, and Joe Keene in Godbold's presence, when he, Godbold, received from Seavey & Sons one hundred dollars, Godbold remained silent and did not call Seavey's attention to any other claim he had on the cotton. We say that that was the time for him to speak, and failing to do so, he cannot now be heard to complain. His conduct on that occasion was misleading and he is estopped by it. We submit that the cases of Cohn v. Smith, 64 Miss. 816 and McCormick v. Blum, 75 Miss. 81 are decisive of this case in appellant's favor. When Mr. Godbold stood by and allowed Joe and Luther Keene to sell the Cotton as their own without disclosing his lien to Seavey & Sons, he cannot afterwards recover from Seavey & Sons the cotton or its proceeds. ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Tennessee Joint Stock Land Bank v. Bank of Greenwood
...negotiated by delivery." Commercial National Bank v. Canal-Louisiana Bank & Trust Co., 239 U.S. 520, 60 L.Ed. 417. In Seavey & Sons v. Godbold, 99 Miss. 113, 54 So. 838, wherein it appeared that the tenants sold the cotton with consent of the landlord, the court held that such consent amoun......
-
Federal Land Bank of New Orleans v. Southern Credit Corporation
... ... Williams v. Delta Grocery & Cotton Co., 159 Miss ... 575, 132 So. 732; Seavey & Sons v. Godbold, 99 Miss ... 113, 54 So. 838; [188 Miss. 206] Phillips v. Thomas, ... 128 ... ...
-
Thompson v. Hill
...attempt to bring this case within the rule announced in Judd v. Delta Gro. Co., 98 So. 243; Phillips v. Thomas, 91 So. 420; Seavy v. Godvold, 99 Miss. 113, 54 So. 838. in all of these cases the evidence shows that the landlord had entrusted the tenant to sell the cotton or there was a relat......
-
Swift v. Aberdeen Lumber Co.
... ... 11 C ... J., page 624, sec. 339, and page 626, sec. 340; Seavey v ... Godbold, 99 Miss. 113 ... This ... honorable court, in the case of Cohn v ... v. Thomas, 128 Miss. 729; Judd v. Delta Grocery, 133 ... Miss. 866; Seavey & Sons v. Godbold, 99 Miss. 113, ... 54 So. 838; Tonnar v. Washington-Issaquena Bank, 140 ... Miss ... ...