McCraw, Perkins & Webber Co. v. Yates

• Decision Date: 31 October 1927
• Docket Number: 278
• Citation: 298 S.W. 1001,175 Ark. 220
• Parties: MCCRAW, PERKINS & WEBBER COMPANY v. YATES
• Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

298 S.W. 1001

175 Ark. 220

MCCRAW, PERKINS & WEBBER COMPANY v. YATES

No. 278

Supreme Court of Arkansas

October 31, 1927

Appeal from Sharp Chancery Court, Northern District; Alvin S. Irby Chancellor; reversed.

Decree reversed, and cause remanded.

Horace Sloan, for appellant.

OPINION

HUMPHREYS, J.

Appellant filed the following complaint against appellee omitting caption and verification, in the chancery court of the Northern District of Sharp County:

"Comes the plaintiff, McGraw, Perkins & Webber Company, a corporation duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Tennessee, and complaining of the defendant, Ben N. Yates, doing business as Ben N. Yates & Company, for its cause of action states: During the years shown on the attached statement marked Exhibit A is hereby made a part of this complaint. The defendant, Ben N. Yates, doing business as Ben N. Yates & Company in Williford, Arkansas. During said period of time plaintiff was engaged in doing business in Memphis, Tennessee, as a cotton factor. During said period of time said defendant has shipped to the plaintiff, as cotton factor, certain bales of cotton, also drew various drafts in writing on the plaintiff, which drafts were accepted and paid by the plaintiff, said drafts being advances made by the factor on account of the shipment of said bales of cotton by the defendant to the plaintiff. The account consists of various mutual items of debt and credit, involved the sale of numerous bales of cotton, and that the balance due thereon as of date July 20, 1923, is the sum of $ 1,271.65. An itemized account showing said drafts and bales of cotton shipped and charges by way of freight, storage, insurance and interest is attached to this complaint, marked Exhibit A and made a part thereof. Said account is complicated and intricate, and proof supporting the details of said account will be voluminous, intricate and too complicated other than in a court of equity. In addition a quasi-fiduciary relation existed between the plaintiff as cotton factor and defendant as customer, and plaintiff is, for that reason, entitled to an accounting in equity. Plaintiff further states that repeated demands have been made on defendant to pay the balance due on the above account, but he has wholly refused to pay same or any part thereof. Wherefore plaintiff prays judgment against defendant for the said sum of $ 1,271.65, with

...