Mississippi Compress & Warehouse Co. v. Levy

Citations

• 83 Miss. 774

Syllabus

<p>1. Equity ReUef. Adequacy of legal remedy. Privity.</p> <p>Where a railroad company and a cotton compress company, for their own convenience, made an agreement whereby the railroad company, instead of delivering cotton to the consignee, would deliver it to the compress company, and turn over to. the consignee compress tickets calling, not for specific hales, but for an equal number of bales of average weight and quality:</p> <p>(a) There is such a privity between the two companies as entitles a consignee to equitable relief against both of them for the loss of cotton shipped; and</p> <p>(5) Where there was a shortage in shipment, the consignee’s remedy at law, if any, is so inadequate as to entitle him to relief in equity against both companies.</p> <p>3. Same. Uncertainty. Discovery.</p> <p>Where a consignee has no means of knowing whether a railroad company or a compress company has possession of his cotton, each claiming the other to be liable for it, he may, if the uncertainty were produced by their joint action, sue in equity, demanding discovery from each and recovery from either or both' as the facts, when discovered, may justify.</p>