New Orleans, Jackson & Great Northern Railroad v. Echols
Mississippi Supreme Court
Error to the Circuit Court of Hinds County. Hon. George F. BrowN, Judge. The following instructions asked by the defendant were refused: — “ 3. If the jury believe from the evidence that a contract was made as alleged by the declaration, and that by the terms of said contract the articles mentioned in the bill of particulars, under the head of ‘ cost of pipe, shafting and pulley wheels,’ valued, at $450, were to be and remain under said contract the property of said…
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit Court of Hinds County. Hon. George F. BrowN, Judge. The following instructions asked by the defendant were refused: — “ 3. If the jury believe from the evidence that a contract was made as alleged by the declaration, and that by the terms of said contract the articles mentioned in the bill of particulars, under the head of ‘ cost of pipe, shafting and pulley wheels,’ valued, at $450, were to be and remain under said contract the property of said plaintiffs ; and that, when said contract was abandoned, said property was uninjured, and that the only deterioration in its…
1Opinion of the CourtSimrall, C. J.
This suit was brought by Echols & Green, a firm composed of John H. Echols and W. H. H. Green, to recover damages for the non-performance and abandonment by the defendant of its contract with them, after the plaintiffs had expended time, labor and money in the purchase of materials and appliances, and the partial erection of them, in order to put themselves in condition to supply water to its locomotive engines.
The declaration states the contract to be this, in substance : that, on the 15th day of September, 1870, the plaintiffs agreed and bound themselves to locate and establish a…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Vicksburg & Meridian R. R. v. RagsdaleMississippi Supreme Court · 1872
3Cited by3 opinions
- Bell v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1907
- Astro Transport, Inc. v. MontezMississippi Supreme Court · 1980
- Potts v. McPetersMississippi Supreme Court · 1925