Hammel v. Atkinson
Mississippi Supreme Court
Prom the circuit court of Grenada county. Hon. William P. Stevens, Judge. Hammel, appellant, was plaintiff, and Mrs. Atkinson, appellee, defendant in the court below. The action was unlawful entry and detainer. From a judgment in defendant’s favor the plaintiff appealed to the supreme court. The facts are stated in the opinion.
Read the full summary
Prom the circuit court of Grenada county. Hon. William P. Stevens, Judge. Hammel, appellant, was plaintiff, and Mrs. Atkinson, appellee, defendant in the court below. The action was unlawful entry and detainer. From a judgment in defendant’s favor the plaintiff appealed to the supreme court. The facts are stated in the opinion. We call the court’s attention especially to the fact that while T-T mum el had rented the land in connection with other lands to Clarty, yet the land in controversy was not in the actual occupancy of Clarty. The land was not cleared; none of it was in cultivation, but…
1Opinion of the CourtPrice, J.
This was an action of unlawful entry and detainer, under chapter 142 of the Code of 1892. Hammel had rented his place *468to Olarty, and Olarty. was in possession of the land, making a crop. Mrs. Atkinson took possession of forty acres of this land, cleared up a small portion of it, and erected a house thereon. The only question presented by the record is, could the landlord bring this action against a third party while his tenant held possession of the land ? The lower court held that he could not; that the tenant who held the possession under contract with Hammel should bring the suit. In this…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Walton v. WallMississippi Supreme Court · 1915
- Ward v. HudsonMississippi Supreme Court · 1946