Yellow Pine Lumber Co. v. Alabama State Land Co.

• Decision Date: 02 February 1911
• Citation: 54 So. 608,171 Ala. 77
• Parties: YELLOW PINE LUMBER CO. v. ALABAMA STATE LAND CO.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

54 So. 608

171 Ala. 77

YELLOW PINE LUMBER CO. v. ALABAMA STATE LAND CO.

Supreme Court of Alabama

February 2, 1911

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jackson County; W. W. Haralson, Judge.

Action by the Alabama State Land Company against the Yellow Pine Lumber Company for conversion of lumber. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

The facts seem to be that one Ferguson cut about 225,000 feet of lumber from lands belonging to the plaintiff, and sold it to the defendant, and that at the time the suit was brought it was stacked in the mill yard of Ferguson. It seems that when Ferguson's attention was called to the fact that he had gone over the line in cutting the timber he made an effort to purchase the land, and paid to the agent of the corporation owning the land the fee and cash payment usually required with that character of application for the purchase of land. The corporation declined to consummate the trade and Ferguson continued to cut; he claiming that the agent told him it would be all right to continue, as he had purchased, and the agent denying this fact.

The following is charge 8, requested by and given for the plaintiff: "I charge you, gentlemen of the jury, that if the Yellow Pine Lumber Company bought the lumber from J. R Ferguson which he cut from the east half of the southwest quarter and the southwest quarter of the southwest quarter of section 21, township 3, range 9, in Jackson county, Alabama before the levy of the attachment, and claimed said lumber under their said purchase, then that would constitute a conversion of the lumber."

John B Tally, for appellant.

Howard & Hunt, for appellee.

SIMPSON J.

This action is by the appellee against the appellant, for the conversion of certain lumber. One Ferguson, whose employés had gotten over the line and taken some timber from the premises of the plaintiff, proposed to the agent of the plaintiff to buy the land, and paid to him the first purchase money; but the receipt shows that the money was received subject to the ratification by the proper authority of the company, and the evidence shows that said corporation refused to ratify the sale. Ferguson continued to take timber from the lands of the plaintiff, converting it into lumber, and selling the amount involved in this suit to the defendant.

Although Ferguson may have supposed that his proposition to buy would be accepted, and may have relied on the assurance of the agent (which, however, is denied by said agent) that it would be all right for him to go on taking the timber, yet he was presumed to know the law, that the title to the property was not in him, and, consequently, in taking the timber, after he had proposed to buy it, he was a willful trespasser. The defendant, deriving title from him, occupies the same relation as Ferguson. Craze v. Ala. State Land Co., 155 Ala. 431-435, 46 So. 479.

It is insisted, in the next place, that there was no conversion by the appellant, because the evidence shows only that it had bought the lumber from Ferguson, but that it still remained in Ferguson's...