Hunter v. Chicago Lumber & Coal Co.

100 So. 35, 156 La. 19, 1922 La. LEXIS 2540
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedJune 5, 1922
DocketNo. 23195
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 100 So. 35 (Hunter v. Chicago Lumber & Coal Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hunter v. Chicago Lumber & Coal Co., 100 So. 35, 156 La. 19, 1922 La. LEXIS 2540 (La. 1922).

Opinions

By the WHOLE COURT.

LAND, J.

During the year 1907 W. Tur-' ner Bailey, who was an employee of the Louisiana & Northwest Railroad Company, .was injured by the train of the Athens Lumber Company, which it was operating over the line of said railroad company, under a contract by the terms 'of which the said Athens Lumber Company obligated and [21]*21•bound itself to be responsible for all damages that may occur in consequence' of its operating its locomotives or trains Over tbe tracks of said railroad company.

Bailey instituted suit against the railroad company and the Athens Lumber Company for said injuries received by him, and prayed for judgment in solido against both defendants for the sum of $10,000. A judgment was rendered in Bailey’s favor in the lower court against both defendants in solido for the sum of $3,500 with costs, and was affirmed by this court on appeal. See Bailey v. La. & Northwest R. R. Co. et al., 129 La. 1029, 57 South. 325.

The receiver of said railroad company, alleging in his petition that said judgment has been paid by the Athens Lumber Company, the same being a debt of the Athens Lumber Company, for which under its contract it alone is responsible as between the railroad company and itself, has instituted the present suit to have said judgment canceled, and removed from the records, as it operates as a judicial mortgage against the property of the railroad company.

Petitioner alleges that the Athens Lumber Company is a subsidiary of the Chicago Lumber & Coal Company; that the officers and stockholders of the latter company own and control a majority of the stock of the said Athens Lumber Company; that said companies entered into a fraudulent agreement to procure the National Bank of Commerce, of Kansas City, Mo., to advance the money and pay off the Bailey judgment against the railroad company and the Athens Lumber Company, and to take an assignment of said judgment in their name, and to hold the same until such time as the Chicago Lumber & Coal Company instructed them to transfer the same to whomever they stated. Petitioner alleges that in order to carry out said fraudulent scheme the National Bank of Commerce caused.one Fred D. Whiting to take an assignment in his name, which was done for the benefit of said ■ bank, in accordance with the fraudulent agreement between said Chicago Lumber & Coal Company and the Athens Lumber Company. Pe^ titioner alleges that the Chicago Lumber & Coal Company paid the said bank, and the said amount paid was the proceeds of the Athens Lumber Company’s output of its mill plant, which the Chicago Lumber & Coal Company, its officers and stockholders owned, and operated, and that for this judgment of Bailey they were both liable by virtue of said Chicago Lumber & Coal Company owning and controlling the Athens Lumber Company.

Petitioner alleges that the acts of the said Chicago Lumber & Coal Company, the Athens Lumber Company, the National Bank of Commerce, and Fred D. Whiting was a fraudulent simulation entered into by all of said parties to shield and protect thes said Athens Lumber Company and its property from paying the judgment for which it was responsible, and thereby force the Louisiana & Northwest Railroad Company to pay same.

Petitioner alleges that the Chicago Lumber & Coal Company allowed said assignment to Whiting to remain in his name until the said Chicago Lumber & Coal Company and the Athens Lumber Company could dispose of all the Athens Lumber Company’s property of every kind and nature, and dissolve its corporate capacity, the .Chicago Lumber & Coal Company receiving the benefits of the proceeds of said. Athens. Lumber Company’s property and assets well knowing that the Louisiana & Northwest Railroad Company was making every effort to locate and prove the payment of this Bailey judgment, and that they knew that it instituted a suit against the Athens Lumber Company to declare this judgment the debt of the Athens Lumber Company and to decree it [23]*23paid. Petitioner alleges that they also knew that the National Bank of Commerce and Whiting refused as witnesses in said cause to state anything connected with said assignment of said judgment, or to give any statement of the entries on their bank books wherein the payment or assignment appeared, and declined to give a statement of the account of the Chicago Lumber & Coal Company with said bank. Petitioner alleges that they also knew that the lower court in said suit of Louisiana & N. W. R. R. Co. v. Athens Lumber Co., 134 La. 788, 64 South. 714, L. R. A. 1915B, 856, decreed that the Athens Lumber Company was responsible for the Bailey judgment, and ordered them to pay the court expenses, which the railroad had incurred and paid in defending said Bailey.

Petitioner alleges that the Chicago Lumber & Coal Company now claims that it is the owner by purchase and assignment of the Bailey judgment, and that said claim of ownership is a fraudulent simulation as stated above.

Defendant company denies, of course, any fraudulent simulation, scheme, or agreement of any sort; alleges its good faith in purchasing said judgment, and its subrogation by the said Bailey to his rights to enforce the said judgment against either or both of the parties thereto, precisely as the said Bailey might have done. Defendant denies that the amount which it paid to Bailey for the purchase of the said judgment was the proceeds of the Athens Lumber Company’s output of its mill plant, and defendant denies that it owned or operated the Athens Lumber Company or controlled the same. Defendant company prays that plaintiff’s suit against it be rejected at its costs, and that there be judgment recognizing the defendant as the holder and owner of the original judgment in favor of W. Turner Bailey against the Athens Lumber Company and the Louisiana & Northwest Railroad Company in solido, subrogated to all of the rights of the said Bailey and entitled.to enforce the said judgment precisely as he might have done.

The defendant the Chicago Dumber & Coal Company would have it appear to the court that said company is and always has been a distinct and separate corporate entity from the Athens Lumber Company, and that the latter corporation was organized in good faith, and operated by its officers arid stockholders as a distinct and separate corporation, and that the only relation that has existed'between defendant company and the Athens Lumber Company has arisen in the usual course of dealings between such companies, defendant company alleging that it is in the business of jobbing lumber, i. e., of purchasing the output of mills, advancing money thereon, and selling such output to other dealers in lumber, and that in this way defendant company established business connections with the Athens Lumber Company, which became a debtor to the defendant -company to a large amount.

While defendant company denies in its answer that it has owned any stock at any time in the Athens Lumber Company, yet it admits in said answer that it is true that individuals who hold stock in the Chicago Lumber & Coal Company also hold a majority of the stock in the Athens Lumber Company. But Itobt. W. Fullerton, a stockholder, a member of the board of directors, and the secretary of the Chicago Lumber & Coal Company, places a very different aspect upon the relations existing between said company and the Athens Lumber Company in the testimony given by him and found in his depositions filed in this suit. .

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Ritsch Alluvial Land Co. v. Adema
30 So. 2d 753 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1947)
T. Aucoin &. Sons v. Young
138 So. 437 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1931)
T. Aucoin & Sons v. Young
132 So. 133 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1931)
Bailey v. Louisiana N.W.R. Co.
105 So. 626 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1925)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
100 So. 35, 156 La. 19, 1922 La. LEXIS 2540, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hunter-v-chicago-lumber-coal-co-la-1922.