Mason v. Harlow

• Decision Date: 11 March 1911
• Docket Number: 16,889
• Citation: 84 Kan. 277,114 P. 218
• Parties: JAMES M. MASON, Appellant, v. SKIP D. HARLOW, Appellee
• Court: Kansas Supreme Court

114 P. 218

84 Kan. 277

JAMES M. MASON, Appellant, v. SKIP D. HARLOW, Appellee

No. 16,889

Supreme Court of Kansas

March 11, 1911

Decided January, 1911.

Appeal from Wyandotte district court.

Judgment reversed.

SYLLABUS

SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.

1. INJUNCTION -- Prosecution of Action in Another State. Equity has power to restrain a party within its jurisdiction from prosecuting a suit in the courts of another state, and in a proper case will not hesitate to exercise the power.

2. INJUNCTION -- Grounds--Action Brought Maliciously. Courts will not enjoin a suit in another state merely on the ground of convenience of parties, but will do so when such restraint is necessary to prevent one citizen from doing an inequitable thing, as where the action has been brought maliciously, in order to vex and harass another citizen or to interfere with or prevent the free administration of justice in a suit pending in this state.

3. INJUNCTION -- Petition--Demurrer. The petition in this case examined, and held, that it states a cause of action, and that it was error to sustain a demurrer to the petition and to refuse a restraining order.

J. M Mason, Lawrence J. Mason, and E. E. Chesney, for the appellant.

John A. Hale, and Richard J. Higgins, for the appellee.

OPINION

PORTER J.

James M. Mason brought this suit against Skip D. Harlow to enjoin the prosecution of an action in the courts of Arkansas in which Harlow sought to recover against Mason damages for alleged libelous matter contained in certain letters. The court refused to grant a temporary restraining order, and sustained a demurrer to the petition. This court, in order to preserve the status, issued an order restraining the prosecution of the action in Arkansas pending the appeal from the decision of the district court.

The only question to be determined is whether the petition stated a cause of action. If it did, the court erred in refusing the restraining order and in sustaining the demurrer. The petition is lengthy, and contains a great deal of unnecessary verbiage and averments of evidentiary facts which have no place in a pleading. Briefly, the facts stated are that Mason is a regular practicing attorney of the Wyandotte county bar. He brought a suit in the district court of that county for his client, Maggie A. Hanke, against Harlow to set aside a deed from her conveying her homestead to J. H. Peterson, on the ground that Harlow had by fraudulent misrepresentations induced her to exchange her property for a worthless tract of land in Fulton county, Arkansas. The defendant served Mason with notice to take the depositions of a number of witnesses at Mammoth Springs, Ark. Mason corresponded with one Brittain, of Mammoth Springs, who claimed to be a lawyer, and retained him to represent the plaintiff in taking the depositions and in procuring evidence for other depositions on behalf of Mrs. Hanke. Being unable to obtain any information from Brittain with regard to the depositions after they had been taken, and learning that they were being withheld, Mason went to Arkansas for the purpose of investigating the situation. While there he served notice to take other depositions at the same place on August 26, 1909. He was there solely as the attorney of his client, and not for any matter personal to himself, and was engaged in looking after her interests. While there Harlow sued him in the circuit court of Fulton county, Arkansas, for $ 25,000 damages for an alleged libel in a letter of instructions which he had written to Brittain, and caused Mason to be served with process on August 24, two days before the time set for taking depositions. The action was not brought in good faith, but for the purpose of preventing Mason from properly discharging his duties to his client, and was inspired solely by vindictive and malicious purposes. Mason owned no property in Arkansas, and there were no debts owing to him there. Harlow and Mason both resided in Wyandotte county, Kansas.

The demurrer admits the facts pleaded, and it is difficult to discover on what ground the court sustained the demurrer and refused the restraining order. The petition alleges that the action in Arkansas was not brought in good faith,...