Heekin Can Company v. Kimbrough
Decision Date | 17 August 1961 |
Docket Number | Civ. A. No. 1559. |
Citation | 196 F. Supp. 912 |
Parties | HEEKIN CAN COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. W. Bradley KIMBROUGH and The Lawrence Warehouse Company, Defendants. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Arkansas |
Crouch, Jones, Blair & Cypert, Springdale, Ark., Kyte, Conlan, Wulsin & Vogeler, Cincinnati, Ohio, for plaintiff.
Daily & Woods, Ft. Smith, Ark., Charles O. Butler, Chicago, Ill., for defendants.
The plaintiff, The Heekin Can Company, is a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Ohio and qualified to do business in the State of Arkansas.
The defendant, The Lawrence Warehouse Company, is a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of California and qualified to do business in the State of Arkansas.
At all times material to the issues in this case, the plaintiff was engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling metal containers for the food canning industry, and regularly sold on credit and without security substantial quantities of such containers to the Ozark Packing Company, Ozark, Arkansas, hereinafter referred to as "Ozark."
Likewise, at all times material herein, the defendant, The Lawrence Warehouse Company, hereinafter referred to as "Lawrence," maintained a bonded warehouse on the premises of Ozark.
The defendant, W. Bradley Kimbrough, was the president and manager of Ozark, an Arkansas Corporation with its principal place of business at Ozark, Arkansas, which was engaged in the business of processing and canning beans, peas, potatoes, etc.
On November 30, 1959, the plaintiff filed its complaint against the defendants in which it sought to recover judgment against the defendants for the sum of $20,153.23, with interest thereon from February 24, 1958, a reasonable attorney's fee and its costs.
In its complaint the plaintiff alleged that the warehouse facility was established on the premises of Ozark prior to January 1, 1955; that the said warehouse was at all times operated and managed by and under the complete control of Lawrence, and the duties of Lawrence as operator of the warehouse consisted of "receiving into said warehouse such goods and material of the Ozark Packing Company as said company elected to store therein, of counting and recording the exact amount of the goods and materials so received, of issuing in its name receipts, generally known as warehouse receipts, representing the exact amount of the goods and materials so received, of maintaining accurate records as to all goods and materials received into said warehouse and as to all warehouse receipts issued therefor, of taking all necessary measures and precautions to safeguard and secure all goods and materials stored in said warehouse, and of discharging or releasing from said warehouse any of the goods and materials stored therein only upon the presentment to it of the receipt or receipts issued by it and representing such goods and materials."
That the defendants during the years of 1954-1957, inclusive, conspired to effect and through their concerted actions did effect a scheme to defraud the creditors and prospective creditors of Ozark, among whom was this plaintiff. That the alleged conspiracy and scheme to defraud was effectuated by the defendants in the following manner:
The plaintiff further alleged that as a result of the effectuation of the conspiracy and scheme of the defendants, the following representations were made to the plaintiff and to that class of persons of which the plaintiff was a member:
That the plaintiff relied upon all of the alleged false representations of the financial soundness of Ozark, and continued to deal with Ozark, "and extended a line of credit to said company, which in the absence of such representations, it would never have done; that the continuance of such course of dealing and the extension of such line of credit was the direct result of, and would not have come about but for the fraudulent scheme of the defendants, acting jointly and in concert; and that such credit extended (on the sale of cans to the Ozark Packing Company) exceeded payments made to it by the Ozark Packing Company by the amount of $20,153.23 on that date in February 1957 when said company ceased its operations."
Prior to the filing of the instant suit, the plaintiff had on May 28, 1958, obtained a judgment against Ozark for $20,153.23, with interest from February 24, 1958. An execution issued on said judgment was returned nulla bona.
Prior to the commencement of the instant suit, the defendant, W. Bradley Kimbrough, had become a citizen and resident of the State of Louisiana and no service of summons was had on said defendant.
On December 24, 1959, Lawrence filed its answer in which it admitted the allegations of citizenship of the parties and that the parties were engaged in the operation of the businesses as alleged by plaintiff, but alleged that the agreement entered into between it and Ozark did not involve the presentment to it (Lawrence) of any receipt or receipts by the holders thereof upon the delivery from the warehouse of any goods or commodities covered by such receipts; that all warehouse receipts issued by it from time to time were nonnegotiable in character, and that under the laws of the State of Arkansas it was not required that said warehouse receipts be surrendered or presented to this defendant by the holders thereof upon the delivery of the goods and commodities covered by such receipts from the warehouse; that it was authorized by law, as contemplated by the warehouse agreement, to deliver goods and commodities covered by said warehouse receipts upon releases duly executed by the holders of said warehouse receipts and that this practice was followed by it at all times in the operation of the warehouse.
All other allegations in the complaint were denied by Lawrence.
On August 5, 1960, the plaintiff, after obtaining leave of court, filed an amendment to the complaint by adding Count II following paragraph 8 of the original complaint, and alleged that Lawrence was negligent and grossly negligent in that:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
United States v. Carroll
...impels us to hold the court erred in failing to direct a verdict for the defendant upon this matter." See, also, Heekin Can Co. v. Kimbrough, (W.D.Ark.1961) 196 F.Supp. 912; and Williams v. Oklahoma Tire & Supply Co., (W.D.Ark.1949) 85 F.Supp. Therefore, in view of the basic facts as proven......
-
DOUGLAS-GUARDIAN WAREHOUSE CORPORATION v. Nickell
...were at the direction of his other employer, Ozark, but with the knowledge and consent of the plaintiff. In Heekin Can Company v. Kimbrough, (W.D.Ark.1961) 196 F.Supp. 912, the Lawrence Warehouse Company sought to recover for a shortage in a field warehouse of the Heekin Can Company at Ozar......
- United States v. Association of Citizens Councils of La.