Moss Federal Coal Company v. Rhea

284 S.W. 100, 215 Ky. 18, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 642
Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976)·Decided June 4, 1926·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Dietzman

Affirmr ing.'

Tbe facts of tbis case are- these: The appellant. Moss Federal Coal Company, a corporation, is engaged *19 -in the mining of coal in Bell county, Kentucky. We shall hereafter refer to it as the coal company. The Moss Stores Company, another corporation, whom we shall refer to as the stores company, is engaged in the retail mercantile business in the -vicinity of the mines of the coal company. There is no identity of ownership or officials of the two companies. The appellee Rhea is likewise engaged in the retail mercantile business at Carey in Bell county, Kentucky, near to the place of business of the stores company. A few years ago the coal company and the stores company had some litigation with Rhea under these circumstances: The coal companv had issued to its employees a lot of scrip redeemable at the store of the stores company, which scrip Rhea had taken in at its face value for merchandise he had sold to the miners of the coal company. On the refusal of the coal company to redeem that scrip, Rhea began suits in the quarterly court against the coal company to recover the face value of the scrip. The coal company thereupon brought an injunction suit in the circuit court to enjoin Rhea in the prosecution of these suits in the quarterly court. The circuit court granted a temporary injunction, which was dissolved by Judge Thomas, now our Chief Justice, with whom sat Judges Settle, Clarke and Clay, in the consideration of the matter. Nothing further was done in that litigation and presumably the coal company redeemed the scrip Rhea then had on hand. Thereafter the stores company issued a lot of metal discs on the obverse side of which was stamped “Moss Stores Company, Inc., Pineville, Ky.,” and on the reverse side of which was stamped “Grood for $1.00 (or other value) in merchandise.” The stores company delivered these discs to the coal company and from time to time in the interval between pay days the coal company would issue these discs to its miners, up to the extent of the time the miners had put in and of the wages they had thus earned, although such wages were not then due. When these discs were issued to the miners, their pay accounts were charged by the amount of the discs so issued. If these discs were used by the miners in buying merchandise at the stores company, the stores, company would then at stated intervals present them to the coal company, who would redeem them in cash, less a certain discount, which the stores company allowed the coal company. In the course of time Rhea sold to various miners working for the coal company a lot of *20 merchandise for which he took in payment at their face value these metal discs, and at the time of the institution of this action he had on hand discs amounting in face value to the sum of $1,032.50, which sum before this action was finally tried was increased to $2,121.50,. by reason of discs taken in by Rhea during the prosecution of the suit. It appears that these discs were all taken in by Rhea prior to the passage of chapter 71 of the Acts of 1924, now section 4758'b-l of our statutes. After the pay days of the wages against which these discs had been issued, had come and gone, Rhea demanded of the coal company and the stores company that they and each of them redeem these discs, and on their refusal so to do he brpug’ht this action against both of them seeking to recover from them the face value of the discs he held. The lower court granted him the relief he sought and from that judgment the coal company and the stores company prosecute this appeal.

They insist as grounds for reversal, first, that as the metal discs here involved were not transferable by delivery only, Rhea could not prosecute this action without making as parties to it the various assignors of the discs he held as is required by section 19 of the Code, and in support of this position they cite and rely on the cases of Ashless Coal Company v. Davis, 183 Ky. 406, 209 S. W. 532, and Pond Creek Coal Company v. Riley Lester & Co., 171 Ky. 811, 188 S. W. 907. Conceding without deciding that these metal discs were of such character as not to he transferable' by delivery only and that the assignee of them should in a suit upon them make the assignor a party to 'Such suit, yet we do not find in this record that any objection was ever raised by either appellant in the court below to this claimed defect in parties either by way of special demurrer, by answer under section 118 of the Code or otherwise. In the light of section 92, subsection 4, of the Civil Code, it is well settled that where the question of the defect of parties is not raised in the, lower court, it is not available on appeal. Scott County Board of Education v. Steele, 213 Ky. 343, 280 S. W. 1098.

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

Moss Federal Coal Company v. Rhea, 284 S.W. 100, 215 Ky. 18, 1926 Ky. LEXIS 642 (Ky. 1926).

284 S.W. 100 (Moss Federal Coal Company v. Rhea) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Southern Coal Co. v. Martin's Fork Coal Co.
151 S.W.2d 394 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1940)
Little v. Alexander
80 S.W.2d 32 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1934)
Honaker v. Crutchfield
57 S.W.2d 502 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1933)