Green v. Winona Elevator Co., 48332
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi |
| Writing for the Court | PATTERSON; GILLESPIE |
| Citation | 319 So.2d 224 |
| Parties | James L. GREEN et al., Defendants-Appellants, v. WINONA ELEVATOR COMPANY, a Mississippi Corporation, Complainant-Appellee. |
| Docket Number | No. 48332,48332 |
| Decision Date | 06 October 1975 |
Page 224
v.
WINONA ELEVATOR COMPANY, a Mississippi Corporation,
Complainant-Appellee.
Page 225
Eaves & Eaves, Jackson & Louisville, for defendants-appellants.
Schissel & Harrigill, W. S. Stuckey, Jr., Greenwood, for complainant-appellee.
Before PATTERSON, INZER and WALKER, JJ.
PATTERSON, Justice:
This creditor's suit arises from a decree of the Chancery Court of Leflore County favorable to the complainant. There Winona Elevator Company, hereinafter Winona, sued James L. Green, hereinafter Green, his wife and son for fraudulently conveying, it is alleged, a large quantity of soybeans. The principal issue is venue, occasioned by the situs of the soybeans in Leflore County and Green's residence in Choctaw County.
On February 16, 1973, Green entered into a contract with Winona, a Mississippi corporation, with its principal place of business in Montgomery County for the delivery of 10,000 bushels of soybeans to it on or before December 31, 1973, for $4.15 per bushel.
In reliance upon this agreement Winona contracted the sale of 10,000 bushels of beans to the Co-Op Elevator Company of Greenwood, Leflore County. When Green failed to deliver as he had agreed to do, Winona purchased soybeans at a higher price to fullfill its contract with Co-Op Elevator Company.
After December 31, 1973, Winona demanded delivery of the beans from Green and upon his failure to deliver in accord with the contract, billed him for $13,500, the difference between the price of the beans that Green had agreed to deliver and the price the company was required to pay for them on the open market. Thereafter, Winona received information that Green had stored approximately 16,132 bushels of soybeans in the Co-Op Elevator Company of Greenwood, and filed its bill in Leflore County alleging that Green had fraudulently conveyed soybeans owned by him to his wife and son.
An affidavit of sequestration was also filed to detain 2,250 bushels of the beans, aggregate value of $13,500, within the state to protect the complainant's interest.
The defendant, preliminary to trial, moved for a change of venue to Choctaw County, his place of residence, invoking Mississippi Code Annotated section 11-5-5 (1972) which states in part that such change may be made 'upon the same terms, and for the same causes provided for in the circuit court, . . .' and, of course, Mississippi...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hammond v. State, 55488
...so often that we hope it should be plain to all that the instruction is not proper. Butler v. State, 245 So.2d 605 (Miss.1971). 319 So.2d at 224. See also Taurasi v. State, 233 Miss. 330, 102 So.2d 120 (1958); Dolan v. State, 195 Miss. 154, 13 So.2d 925 (1943); Swanner v. State, 191 Miss. 4......
-
Purdue Pharma L.P. v. State, 2017-IA-00300-SCT
...by a general venue statute. See Guice v. Miss. Life Ins. Co. , 836 So.2d 756, 759 (Miss. 2003) (citing Green v. Winona Elevator Co. , 319 So.2d 224, 226 (Miss. 1975) ). Similarly, this Court has held that[h]ad the Legislature intended for each statute to have equal footing or equal force th......
-
Markel American Ins. Co. v. Tri-Miss Servs. Inc., CIVIL ACTION NO: 3:10-CV-702-DPJ-FKB
...that insurance company's money paid to insured was personal property under Mississippi's venue statute); Green v. Winona Elevator Co., 319 So. 2d 224 (Miss. 1975) (holding that soybeans were personal property). In light of this broad authority, and absent a reasonable countervailing interpr......
-
Guice v. Mississippi Life Ins. Co., 2000-IA-01516-SCT.
...So.2d 353, 358 (1961)). ¶ 11. The venue of a suit in equity in our state is governed entirely by statute. Green v. Winona Elevator Co., 319 So.2d 224, 226 (Miss.1975)(quoting Griffith, Mississippi Chancery Practice, § 151 (2d ed.1950)). This necessitates consideration of the general statute......
-
Hammond v. State, 55488
...so often that we hope it should be plain to all that the instruction is not proper. Butler v. State, 245 So.2d 605 (Miss.1971). 319 So.2d at 224. See also Taurasi v. State, 233 Miss. 330, 102 So.2d 120 (1958); Dolan v. State, 195 Miss. 154, 13 So.2d 925 (1943); Swanner v. State, 191 Miss. 4......
-
Purdue Pharma L.P. v. State, 2017-IA-00300-SCT
...by a general venue statute. See Guice v. Miss. Life Ins. Co. , 836 So.2d 756, 759 (Miss. 2003) (citing Green v. Winona Elevator Co. , 319 So.2d 224, 226 (Miss. 1975) ). Similarly, this Court has held that[h]ad the Legislature intended for each statute to have equal footing or equal force th......
-
Markel American Ins. Co. v. Tri-Miss Servs. Inc., CIVIL ACTION NO: 3:10-CV-702-DPJ-FKB
...that insurance company's money paid to insured was personal property under Mississippi's venue statute); Green v. Winona Elevator Co., 319 So. 2d 224 (Miss. 1975) (holding that soybeans were personal property). In light of this broad authority, and absent a reasonable countervailing interpr......
-
Guice v. Mississippi Life Ins. Co., 2000-IA-01516-SCT.
...So.2d 353, 358 (1961)). ¶ 11. The venue of a suit in equity in our state is governed entirely by statute. Green v. Winona Elevator Co., 319 So.2d 224, 226 (Miss.1975)(quoting Griffith, Mississippi Chancery Practice, § 151 (2d ed.1950)). This necessitates consideration of the general statute......