Shields v. Barrow

Robert Barrow (plaintiff) filed an action asking the court to annul and set aside an agreement he had with Victoire Shields (Mrs. Shields) (defendant), William Bisland (defendant), Thomas Shields (Mr. Shields), and four others (indorsers). Barrow had originally contracted to sell various purported property to Mr. Shields, but Mr. Shields defaulted on his payments. Barrow successfully obtained judgment against Mr. Shields. After entry of judgment, Barrow and Mr. Shields entered into a compromise agreement, in which Mr. Shields and six of his indorsers, including Mrs. Shields and Bisland, agreed to pay Barrow only a portion of what was owed under the original contract. Barrow then sued to have the compromise agreement rescinded on grounds of fraud and his rights under the original contract restored, but he only filed his action against Mrs. Shields and Bisland. Bisland and Mrs. Shields denied the allegations, and Bisland filed a crossclaim against Barrow for specific performance on the compromise agreement. Barrow then sought leave to amend his complaint to add Mr. Shields as a party and also change his prayer for relief to have the compromise agreement enforced instead. The circuit court allowed the amendment and then entered an order requiring Mrs. Shields and Bisland to file a crossclaim demanding specific performance on the compromise agreement and making all of the indorsers parties to the suit. After further proceedings and an order from the circuit court in favor of Barrow, Mrs. Shields and Bisland appealed.