Michalson v. All

• Citation: 43 S.C. 459,21 S.E. 323
• Parties: MICHALSON. v. ALL et al.
• Decision Date: 02 April 1895
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina

21 S.E. 323

43 S.C. 459

MICHALSON.

v.ALL et al.

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

April 2, 1895.

Action on the Case—Converting Property Subject to Lien.

Where a person, with the connivance of the owner, converts to his own use farm products subject to an agricultural lien, and places them beyond the reach of the lienee under the statutory proceedings, the latter may, in an action similar to case at common law, recover his damages.

Appeal from common pleas circuit court of Barnwell county; I. D. Witherspoon, Judge.

Action by Isaac Michalson against W. A. All, Jr., & Co. There was a judgment for defendants, and plaintiff appeals. Reversed.

James E. Davis and A. M. Boozer, for appellant.

Patterson & Holman, for respondents.

POPE, J. The plaintiff, by his complaint, alleged that on the 6th day of February, 1893, one John Kirkland executed to him an agricultural lien, —that is, a lien on all the crops the said John Kirkland should make during the year 1893 on the plantation of land known as the "Boynton Place, "—to secure some $270 advanced to said Kirkland by the plaintiff in supplies to make such crops; that all the cotton made by said Kirkland was three bales of cotton; and that the defendants, well knowing that the said Kirkland had given to the plaintiff an agricultural lien on said cotton, and in fraud of plaintiff's rights, induced the said Kirkland, in the nighttime, to haul said three bales of cotton from the Boynton place to the defendants' place of business; that the defendants thereafter placed the said three bales of cotton beyond the reach of the agricultural lien, and converted the same to their own use, to the damage of the plaintiff $270. The defendant demurred to this complaint, because it failed to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The cause came on to be heard before his honor, Judge Witherspoon, on the complaint and the demurrer thereto; whereupon the said circuit judge sustained the demurrer, in the following judgment: "The defendants interpose a demurrer to the complaint, on the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The plaintiff seeks in this action to enforce his rights upon an agricultural lien. It was held in Sternberger v. McSween, 14 S. C. 35, and Kennedy v. Reames, 15 S. C. 548, that the only remedy to enforce rights under an agricultural lien is that provided by the statute. After hearing argument by counsel, I conclude that the defendants' demurrer must be sustained,...