From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brotherhood R. Trainmen v. Agnew

Supreme Court of Mississippi, Division B
Sep 11, 1934
155 So. 204 (Miss. 1934)

Opinion

No. 31270.

May 28, 1934. Suggestion of Error Overruled September 11, 1934.

EQUITY.

Where foreign trainmen's brotherhood, engaged in pension business, had never designated state insurance commissioner as its agent for service of process, brotherhood held not entitled, under clean hands doctrine, to maintain bill to set aside default judgment against it based on alleged improper service of process on officer of local lodge (Code 1930, section 5246).

APPEAL from Chancery Court of Hinds County.

Alexander, Alexander Satterfield, of Jackson, for appellant.

Injunction against execution under a void judgment is a matter of equitable right.

2 Story's Eq. Jur., sec. 855; Robertson v. Aetna Insurance Co., 134 Miss. 398, 406; Walker v. Gulfport, Freeman Chancery, 85; Joslin v. Coffin, 5 How. 539; Crawford v. Redus, 54 Miss. 700; Sivley v. Summers, 57 Miss. 712; Oliver v. Baird, 90 Miss. 718; Hester v. Kembrough, 12 S. M. 659; Welch v. Hannie, 112 Miss. 79, 87; Stewart v. Brooks, 62 Miss. 492; Newman v. Taylor, 69 Miss. 670, 673; Wilson v. Montgomery, 14 S. M. 205.

A judgment by default without service of process is void and may be enjoined.

Duncan v. Gerdine, 59 Miss. 550; Jones v. Bank, 5 How. 43; Lapiece v. Hughes, 24 Miss. 69; Hale v. Bozeman, 60 Miss. 965.

Lotterhos Travis, of Jackson, for appellee.

We readily concede that the chancery court has the power to enjoin execution under a void judgment as a general principle, but we deny that the judgment entered by the circuit court is void.

It appears that appellant could not proceed in chancery because, pending the appeal from the circuit court, it is attempting to go into the validity of the circuit court judgment and does not rely merely on some independent equity.

No harm could come to the appellant by being required to exhaust its recourse in the circuit court and by appeal therefrom before proceeding in chancery, because pending its supersedeas appeal there could be no execution in the law court.


Appellant filed its original bill in the chancery court of Hinds county alleging the invalidity of a judgment rendered in the circuit court against the appellant, and the improper service of process upon one J.E. Pierce, secretary and treasurer. Said judgment in the circuit court was a default judgment for the sum of one thousand one hundred ninety dollars. The injunction is predicated upon the allegation that J.E. Pierce, shown in the testimony to be "J.E. Pierce, secretary and treasurer" of a local lodge in Jackson, Mississippi, was not an officer of the brotherhood for the purpose of having process served upon him. The bill does not allege who was the proper person upon whom process might be served, and the record shows that the appellant had never designated the insurance commissioner of the state as its agent upon whom process could be served as required by section 5246, Code 1930, reading as follows:

"Every society, whether domestic or foreign, now transacting business in this state, shall, within thirty days after the passage of this article, and every such society hereafter applying for admission, shall, before being licensed, appoint in writing the superintendent of insurance and his successors in office to be its true and lawful attorney on whom all legal process in any action or proceeding against it shall be served, and in such writing shall agree that any lawful process against it which is served upon such attorney shall be of the same legal force and validity as if served upon the society and that the authority shall continue in force so long as any liability remains outstanding in this state. Copies of such appointment, certified by said superintendent of insurance, shall be deemed sufficient evidence thereof and shall be admitted in evidence with the same force and effect as the original thereof might be admitted. Service shall only be made upon such attorney, shall be made in duplicate upon the superintendent of insurance, or, in his absence, upon the person in charge of his office, and shall be deemed sufficient service upon such society; provided, however, that no such service shall be valid or binding against any such society when it is required thereunder to file its answer, pleading or defense in less than thirty days from the date of mailing the copy of such service to such society. When legal process against any such society is served upon said superintendent of insurance he shall forthwith forward by registered mail one of the duplicate copies prepaid and directed to the secretary or corresponding officer. Legal process shall not be served upon any such society except in the manner provided herein."

It is undisputed that the insurance commissioner was not designated as such agent by the appellant, and, consequently, it is not in court with clean hands with reference to the transaction.

The record shows that the local lodge, and J.E. Pierce, had been dealt with by numerous persons, and with the appellee in reference to the particular application for a pension involved in the case at bar. We are not authorized to lend the aid requested to the appellant, but will leave it to stand upon its rights in the suit at law.

The judgment of the court below will, therefore, be affirmed.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Brotherhood R. Trainmen v. Agnew

Supreme Court of Mississippi, Division B
Sep 11, 1934
155 So. 204 (Miss. 1934)
Case details for

Brotherhood R. Trainmen v. Agnew

Case Details

Full title:BROTHERHOOD OF RAILROAD TRAINMEN v. AGNEW

Court:Supreme Court of Mississippi, Division B

Date published: Sep 11, 1934

Citations

155 So. 204 (Miss. 1934)
155 So. 204

Citing Cases

Dansby v. Insurance Co.

Fire Ins. Co. v. Sayle, 107 Miss. 169; National Surety Co. v. Board of Commissioners, 120 Miss. 706; Casualty…

Williams v. Gen. Insurors, Inc.

It is a familiar maxim of the courts of equity that he who comes into the court of equity must come with…