Archer v. Helm
Mississippi Supreme Court
From the circuit court of Washington county. Hon. R. W. Williamson, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion. For a r.eport of this case on a former appeal, when only a. question of law was decided, see Archer v. Helm, 69 Miss., 780. 1. The court erred in admitting the testimony of Fontaine that he was employed by appellant, Archer, in conjunction with Toombs and others, to make the survey in 1888. This testimony was incompetent and misleading.
Read the full summary
From the circuit court of Washington county. Hon. R. W. Williamson, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion. For a r.eport of this case on a former appeal, when only a. question of law was decided, see Archer v. Helm, 69 Miss., 780. 1. The court erred in admitting the testimony of Fontaine that he was employed by appellant, Archer, in conjunction with Toombs and others, to make the survey in 1888. This testimony was incompetent and misleading. It did not go to show that Archer employed the surveyor to locate the line between Helm and himself. The purpose of the survey, as Fontaine said,…
1Opinion of the Court
'Mayes, Special Judge,
delivered the opinion of the court.
This is an action of ejectment growing out of a controverted boundary line in township 19, range 6 west, in Washington county. The line in question is that which divides sections 8 and 9. Several efforts have been made to fix this boundary. Some considerable time before this action was instituted, two certain surveys were made, resulting in what are known as the OTIea and the Gordon lines, of which the latter is a chain or two eastward of the former.
Stating approximately, and with sufficient, accuracy for the purposes of this case, it…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Bank v. KennedySupreme Court of the United States · 1873
- Meek v. PerryMississippi Supreme Court · 1858
3Cited by2 opinions
- Georgetown Mercantile Co. v. SteenMississippi Supreme Court · 1929
- J. M. Jones Lumber Co. v. Homochitto Development Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1932