Griffis v. Wilson

Conceding that the complaint states a cause of action on the case, as is insisted upon by appellant, still this holding cannot work a reversal of the case, for the reason that the testimony shows without dispute that the appellee was in possession of the property described in the complaint, nor was there any testimony to indicate that the appellant’s lien had been in any wise destroyed, or its enforcement impaired. Eor aught that is shown, the cotton and seed remained subject to the lien and available to it, just as fully and to the same extent whilst the property was in appellee’s possession…