Skip to main content
· 4/15/1888

Mills v. New Orleans Seed Co.

Citations

  • 65 Miss. 391

Syllabus

<p>J. Chancery Jurisdiction. Many acts of continuous wrong. Case in judg- . ment.</p> <p>The N. O. company, engaged in the business of buying and crushing cotton seed, owned a large number, of sacks, which it was accustomed to distribute to producers throughout the seed-producing country, to be filled and re-shipped to it. The W. company, a corporation in the same business, was in the habit of wilfully, knowingly and persistently using and procuring to be used the sacks of the N. O. company in shipment of seed to itself, against the protest of the N. O. company. And in one instance, when seed were shipped to the W. company in the sacks of the N. O. company, the former returned the sacks to the producers to be again filled with seed and re-shipped to it, placing one of its own sacks on the top and bottom of each bundle of sacks so returned. The N. O. company, after instituting various actions of replevin without stopping the wrong, filed a hill in chancery, setting out the above stated facts, and asking that the W. company he restrained from so using complainants’ sacks, that it be made to account for sacks already so used and damaged, and also oe made to pay damages equal to the profits arising from the business in handling such seed as it thus obtained, and which complainant would have received hut for defendants’ conduct. The defendant demurred to the hill, denying the jurisdiction of chancery. The demurrer was overruled. Held, that the Chancery Court has jurisdiction, and the demurrer was properly overruled.</p> <p>2. Same. Sepeated acts of trespass. Injunction.</p> <p>If a trespass he continuous in its nature, and repeated acts of trespass are done, or threatened by the same wrong doer, in respect to the same subject-matter, although each of such acts, taken by itself, may not be destructive or inflict irreparable injury, and the legal remedy for such act, if it stood alone, would be adequate, yet, where the legal remedy is inadequate to relieve the injured part

Judges: Arnold

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.