Pierce v. Jarnagin
Mississippi Supreme Court
Error to the Circuit Court of Noxubee County. Hon. James M. ARNOLD, Judge. 1. This action was to recover what had been paid Jarnagin 6 Rives for the claims, for the full amount whereof judgments had been obtained long after the payment. Time is material in the purchase of claims against a third person. When the principal refused to ratify bis agent’s acts, and sued on the claims, Pierce was entitled to recover back his money.
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit Court of Noxubee County. Hon. James M. ARNOLD, Judge. 1. This action was to recover what had been paid Jarnagin 6 Rives for the claims, for the full amount whereof judgments had been obtained long after the payment. Time is material in the purchase of claims against a third person. When the principal refused to ratify bis agent’s acts, and sued on the claims, Pierce was entitled to recover back his money. Hanson v. Field, 41 Miss. 712; Jagers v. Griffin, 43 Miss. 134 ; Martin v. Tarver, 43 Miss. 517; Story on Agency, § 300; Cox v. Prentice, B M. & S. 344; Flliott v.…
1Opinion of the CourtGeorge, C. J.
The plaintiff in error sued the defendant in error, in the court below, to recover the sum of $475, which he had paid to one Rives, now deceased, who was an attorney at law, and the partner of the defendant in error, Jarnagin. It appears, that Rives, in the name of the firm and on its behalf, sold to the plaintiff certain claims, which the firm held for collection, at 25 per cent on their face value, amounting to the sum of $620 ; of which the plaintiff paid $475, at the time of his purchase and agreed to pay the remainder the next week. The sale was not to be considered as consummated till…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Neis v. O'BrienWashington Supreme Court · 1895
- Gibbons v. HaydenCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1896