Caldwell v. Hart
Mississippi Supreme Court
Appeal from the Chancery Court of Hinds County. Hon. E. G. PeytoN, Chancellor. The bill states that the account was for plantation supplies ; but Hart testifies that it was for both family and plantation supplies, without distinguishing' them. This is a failure of proof. The grounds of liability are different in the two cases.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Chancery Court of Hinds County. Hon. E. G. PeytoN, Chancellor. The bill states that the account was for plantation supplies ; but Hart testifies that it was for both family and plantation supplies, without distinguishing' them. This is a failure of proof. The grounds of liability are different in the two cases. Gruion v. Doherty, 43 Miss. 538 ; Cooh v. Ligón, 54 Miss. 368 ; Grrubbs v. Collins, 54 Miss. 485. It is not affirmatively shown that the plantation supplies, if there were any, ever reached the plantation, while, under the facts in this case, only the use of them could…
1Opinion of the CourtGeorge, C. J.
The appellees are merchants in the city of Jackson, and filed their bill in the Chancery Court of Hinds County, against the appellant, for the purpose of enforcing the collection, out of her separate estate, of an open account created by her husband. The bill exhibits the account, and states that the appellees sold the goods mentioned in it to Charles Caldwell, the husband, and charged the same to him, supposing that he was the owner of the plantation, which really belonged to the wife. The bill admits that the entire credit for the goods was in the first instance given to the husband, under…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Guion v. DohertyMississippi Supreme Court · 1871
3Cited by1 opinion
- Porter v. StatenMississippi Supreme Court · 1886