Vandegrift & Sons v. Hawkins

Assumpsit. Mortgages; Shcwe in G-roioing drop.- — Where one party furnishes the land, teams and" feed, and the other party 'furnishes the labor, with an agreement to divide the crops raised, the relation of hiring exists, and hence, the title to the crop is in the owner of the land, and a mortgage by one who furnishes the labor on his share of- the crop before it is gathered conveyed no interest therein. (Section 4743, Codé 1907.) ' ' ' -

Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court. Heard before Hon. A. H. Alston. Assumpsit by A. B. Vandergrift & Son against J. W: Hawldns. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiffs appeal. The testimony tended to show that one Evans and defendant made a contract to farm on shares; Hawkins furnishing the land and team, and Evans the labor. Evans executed to the plaintiff a mortgage on his share of the crop, but before the crop was gathered Evans was arrested for some reason, and when he was released from jail he returned to the farm, but, seeing nothing in the crop for himself, abandoned it and went to work in a coal mine. Hawkins finished cultivating the crop, and had it gathered, and sold it, and this suit is to recover for the interest that the firm had in Evans’ part of the crop. Whether a tenant in common or laborer, Evans had an interest in the crop grown by him. — 107 Ala. 396; 107 Ala. 716. Having an interest acquired from Evans appellants had a right to establish the amount of the demand secured by the lien. — Authorities supra. The court erred in excluding plaintiff’s evidence that after Evans abandoned the crop they offered to pay Hawkins what Evans owed him, and to gather the crop, and that Hawkins refused. — 57 Ala. 581 ■; 77 Ala. 283. The contract was one for joint benefit. — Ragsdale v. Kenny, 119 Ala. 454!' Wages to be earned may be assigned. — Harrison v. L. & N. R. R. Co., 120 Ala. 42. — No brief came to- the Reporter..