Mills v. New Orleans Seed Co.

• Decision Date: 23 April 1888
• Citation: 4 So. 298,65 Miss. 391
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court
• Parties: WARREN MILLS v. NEW ORLEANS SEED CO

4 So. 298

65 Miss. 391

WARREN MILLS v. NEW ORLEANS SEED CO

Supreme Court of Mississippi

April 23, 1888

APPEAL from the Chancery Court of Warren County, HON. WARREN COWAN Chancellor.

This suit was instituted by a bill in equity exhibited by the "New Orleans Seed Company," a corporation located in New Orleans, La., against the "Warren Mills," a corporation located in Vicksburg, in this State.

The bill alleges that complainant is engaged in the business of buying, collecting and crushing cotton seed; that in the pursuit of such business it is necessary that sacks be used for holding the seed in shipments; that complainant owns several hundred thousand such sacks, all of which are legibly branded and known to defendant; that such sacks are, in the due course of business, distributed along railroads, river banks, etc., for the producer, who puts seed therein and ships back the sacks so filled to complainant; that such sacks are to be used only in shipping to complainant.

The bill further alleges that defendant is engaged in the same line of business; that in the course of its business "it has repeatedly, knowingly, wilfully, continuously used the sacks" of complainant without its authority and against its remonstrances; that in one case defendant received a large consignment of cotton seed shipped in complainants' sacks, which sacks were returned by defendant to the producers for reshipment of seed, defendant taking the precaution in reshipping such sacks to place one of its own brand on the upper and lower side of each bundle of the sacks; that complainant has repeatedly brought actions of replevin, but defendant gives the necessary bonds and proceeds with its "nefarious" business; that this remedy is wholly inadequate because of the extent of territory over which the business is conducted; that defendant has during the past twelve months used many thousands of complainants' sacks, and it would require innumerable actions at law to obtain redress; that many of complainants' sacks have been damaged, lost or destroyed by defendant, and that complainant has failed to obtain as many seed for crushing as it would had defendant not so used its sacks, by which complainant has lost the profits that would have resulted from crushing such seed; that such profits were made by defendant.

The bill asks a perpetual injunction restraining defendant from any further use of complainants' sacks, and asks that defendant "be made to account for and deliver up all of complainants' sacks now in its possession, and to pay for all damages sustained by reason of injury to and deterioration in the value of said sacks while in possession of defendant, and to pay all profits derived from the use of said sacks, and from the seed in said sacks, to which the complainant is entitled." The defendant demurred to the bill, the demurrer was overruled, and the defendant appealed.

Affirmed and remanded.

Lee &amp McKee, for the appellant.

It is submitted that complainants have an adequate remedy at law by trover, trespass or other appropriate action. The injuries complained of would appear to be susceptible of compensation in...