May v. Sullivan
Mississippi Supreme Court
Appeal from the Chancery Court of Oktibbeha county. Hon. J. S. Hamm, chancellor. This was a bill in chancery, filed on the 6th day of May, 1859, in the names of C. J. Sullivan and John Erwin, as complainants. Afterwards, said Erwin appeared in open court, and stated that the bill had been filed without authority from him, and he, therefore, dismissed the bill so far as his rights were concerned.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Chancery Court of Oktibbeha county. Hon. J. S. Hamm, chancellor. This was a bill in chancery, filed on the 6th day of May, 1859, in the names of C. J. Sullivan and John Erwin, as complainants. Afterwards, said Erwin appeared in open court, and stated that the bill had been filed without authority from him, and he, therefore, dismissed the bill so far as his rights were concerned. The allegations of the bill, so far as they relate to the rights of complainant Sullivan, are, in substance : That in February, 1854, one Huffman, being the owner of a tract of land containing four…
1Opinion of the CourtHandy, J.
The bill in this case having been dismissed, as to the complainant Erwin, all the allegations contained in it, setting up any equity, and asking any relief in his behalf, must be disregarded, and the bill be taken as asserting ■ the rights of Sullivan alone; and the demurrer must be considered as applicable to it in that aspect alone. So regarded, it is clear that the demurrer to it should have been sustained.
1. Sullivan had not been sued on the notes of Erwin, which he had transferred and indorsed, and may never be sued upon them. And it does not appear that Erwin is contesting his liability…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Tahoe Pines Co. v. NewmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922