Carpenter v. Carpenter
Mississippi Supreme Court
Appeal from the chancery court of Leake county. Hon. J. F. McCool, Chancellor. Suit by Wade Carpenter and others, against E. M. Carpenter and others. Ftom the decree, certain defendants appeal. The facts are fully stated in the opinion of the court. This fee should not have been allowed. There was a real controversy between the parties. There wás a propriety in the defendants’ being represented by counsel.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the chancery court of Leake county. Hon. J. F. McCool, Chancellor. Suit by Wade Carpenter and others, against E. M. Carpenter and others. Ftom the decree, certain defendants appeal. The facts are fully stated in the opinion of the court. This fee should not have been allowed. There was a real controversy between the parties. There wás a propriety in the defendants’ being represented by counsel. It was necessary that an answer be filed? The bill filed by complainants contained various damaging mistakes. There were many errors in the bill. Eighty acres of land that never at any time…
1Opinion of the CourtKeed, J.
A bill for partition of certain land was filed by three of the owners of undivided interests therein, and the remaining owners, seven in number, were made defendants. The defendants employed a solicitor, who, upon examination, found errors in the bill of complaint relative to the land sought to be divided in kind. An answer was prepared for defendants by their solicitor and duly filed. In this it was shown that eighty acres of lands owned by all the parties, and which they desired and intended to be partitioned, were omitted, and that other lands, amounting to eighty acres were included in…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hoffman v. SmithMississippi Supreme Court · 1884
3Cited by3 opinions
- Brower v. Rosenbaum & LittleMississippi Supreme Court · 1921
- Parnell v. SmithMississippi Supreme Court · 1975
- Sutton v. SuttonMississippi Supreme Court · 1950