Phillips v. Birmingham Industrial Co.

• Decision Date: 17 June 1909
• Citation: Phillips v. Birmingham Industrial Co., 161 Ala. 509, 50 So. 77 (Ala. 1909)
• Parties: PHILLIPS v. BIRMINGHAM INDUSTRIAL CO.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

50 So. 77

161 Ala. 509

PHILLIPS v. BIRMINGHAM INDUSTRIAL CO.

Supreme Court of Alabama

June 17, 1909

Appeal from Chancery Court, Jefferson County; A. H. Benners Chancellor.

Suit by the Birmingham Industrial Company against Lovick W. Phillips for an accounting. From a decree overruling demurrers to the bill, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

The facts made by the bill are (1) that the complainant, a corporation, purchased of respondent 850 acres of land in Russell county, Ala., and received a deed of conveyance to the same; (2) that at the time of said purchase the said Phillips was in the possession of said land through and by his share croppers, who were engaged in the cultivation of miscellaneous crops, principally cotton, and that at that time the cultivation of the crops had attained to that stage at which little else was left to be done than to properly supervise the needed attention thereto and the gathering thereof; that the said respondent had a full corps of share croppers or supervisors or superintendents, and represented to complainant that, if it became known that the title to the lands had passed out of respondent, it would result in a demoralization of the share croppers and other employés of the said Phillips, and that it would be good policy to keep the transaction secret so far as these employés were concerned, and permit the maturing and gathering of the crop under the ostensible ownership of the respondent, as the relations between him and his employés were cordial, and they would take greater interest in their duties if allowed to remain under the impression that their relation with their old employer continued without interruption; and, realizing the sound argument of said respondent in this behalf complainant entered into an agreement set forth in the copy of an agreement in writing entered into between them, hereto attached and marked "Exhibit B," with reference thereto; (3) that the crops which were being grown and cultivated on the lands described (Exhibit A) were being cultivated under contract of hire by what are known as share croppers, under the terms of the contract with them; the said Phillips furnishing the lands, the teams, feed for the teams and farming implements, and said owner of the land to have one-half of the crop gathered, chargeable only with one-half of the guano used (here follows the names of the share croppers); and that as to all of these share croppers the said respondent was to make his own settlement with them as to what they owed him for advances made by him out of their own share of the crop, the remaining half of the crop being the property of complainant, chargeable only with one-half of the guano used in making the crop, and said respondent was to look after the cultivation and gathering of the crop grown by the wage hands and turn over the proceeds of the crop so grown, chargeable with the wages payable to said wage hands and in addition with the feed of said wage hands and the feed of the teams used by them only, no charge whatsoever to be made on account of the use of teams or for utensils, or for implements or machinery used in the cultivation of said crop; that as part of the agreement the said Phillips was to set apart and reserve, of the old cotton seed, sufficient to plant a ten-mule farm; and orator shows that not only has respondent neglected his duty in this particular behalf, but orator charges that at the special instance of respondent all of the old cotton seed has been removed from said premises, and that he has done all in his power to thwart the efforts of complainant to put the said land in condition of cultivation during the current year; that he has instigated the former employés of respondent to assert claims to the premises not warranted by any contract made between complainant and them, and that he has taken an active part in preventing the assertion of the legal rights of complainant in the courts of the state whenever complainant attempted to assert those rights in the court; that complainant brought an action for the recovery of the old cotton seed, and that said respondent busied himself in person in the courts to obstruct the progress of the cause and nullify the efforts of the complainant to assert its legal rights; that he has intermeddled personally with every effort made by complainant to assert its legal rights and to exercise acts of ownership over said premises, either in the matter of the employment of labor, or in perfecting contracts, or in trying to dispose of said land, having in every manner most flagrantly disregarded and defied the obligation of the trust assumed by him under said agreement, and has failed and refused to render an account of his stewardship, the details of which rest entirely within the knowledge of respondent, who can be made to give an account of the same only through this honorable court of equity. Then follows the prayer for an accounting, and a delivery of all the vouchers, receipts, and other documents belonging to complainant, together with a full, true, and particular account of all the money which has or ought to have been received by him, or any other person on his order or at his conniving, from any rents, incomes, or property arising from said land, and for such other, further, and general relief. The agreement is substantially as set out in the bill. A plea was interposed to the bill, setting up that the cause of action and every part of it arose in Russell and not in Jefferson county, and that respondent lived at all times in Russell. The demurrers in various ways take the point that the bill is without equity, because the complainant has an adequate remedy at law, want of mutuality in account, want of entanglement or complication in the account, and because the answers of defendant to the allegations of the bill are not shown to be essential to complainant to ascertain the true state of the account between complainant and respondent.

W....