Long v. Shackleford
Mississippi Supreme Court
In enter from the northern district chancery court at Car-rollton ; Hon. Henry Dickinson, vice-chancellor. H. H. Fultz, the first administrator of Samuel Long, deceased, recovered judgment on the 28th October, 1844, in the circuit court of Piolines county against Robert Cook, for $951.15, part of which has been paid; that a writ offi.fa. was issued on said judgment, and that said Cook and the sheriff of said county represented to the defendants in error, Shackleford, Harris,…
Read the full summary
In enter from the northern district chancery court at Car-rollton ; Hon. Henry Dickinson, vice-chancellor. H. H. Fultz, the first administrator of Samuel Long, deceased, recovered judgment on the 28th October, 1844, in the circuit court of Piolines county against Robert Cook, for $951.15, part of which has been paid; that a writ offi.fa. was issued on said judgment, and that said Cook and the sheriff of said county represented to the defendants in error, Shackleford, Harris, and Sanders, that it had been levied on the 28th January, 1845, on two negro men slaves, June and Isaac, as the…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice YeRger
This case presents the question, Whether a compromise made with an administrator, by which he agrees, upon payment of part of a judgment, to release the parties from the remainder, is a valid contract, obligatory upon the administrator and all others interested in the estate.
It is well settled as a general rule, that the compromise of a matter in dispute, is a sufficient consideration for a contract, and will bind both parties to the settlement, when made and entered into without fraud.
We are not aware of any principle of law, or any decision of the court, which would prevent the application…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Fender v. PhillipsIndiana Court of Appeals · 1915
- State v. StoryMississippi Supreme Court · 1880
- Pierce v. GarrettMississippi Supreme Court · 1926