Griffith v. Vicksburg Water Works Co.
Mississippi Supreme Court
From tbe chancery court of Warren county. IIon. William P. S. Venteess, Chancellor. Griffith and twenty-eight other persons, the appellants, were complainants in the court below; the Vicksburg Waterworks Company, the appellee, was defendant there. From a decree dissolving an injunction the complainants appealed to the supreme court.
Read the full summary
From tbe chancery court of Warren county. IIon. William P. S. Venteess, Chancellor. Griffith and twenty-eight other persons, the appellants, were complainants in the court below; the Vicksburg Waterworks Company, the appellee, was defendant there. From a decree dissolving an injunction the complainants appealed to the supreme court. By an amendment to its charter approved March 18, 1886, the city of Vicksburg was authorized “to provide for the erection and maintenance of a system of waterworks to supply said city with water, and to that end to contract with a party or parties who shall build…
1Opinion of the Court
Mayes, Special J,
delivered the ojbnion of the court.*
We approve the action of the chancellor in dissolving the injunction on this record. This conclusion makes it unnecessary to pass upon some of the questions argued by the briefs of counsel.
We do not hold that this injunction should have been dissolved because of res adjudícala by the record in federal court cause No. 41. The subject-matter of the controversy -was not the same as the subject of this. There it was, in the main, an attempt on the part of the city to disavow, under and by virtue of the act of 1900, its contract with the water…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Robbins v. Chicago CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1867
- Moran v. SturgesSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Harmon v. Auditor of Public AccountsIllinois Supreme Court · 1887
- Ashton v. . City of RochesterNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
- Griffin v. Goldsboro Water Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1898
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Vicksburg v. Vicksburg Waterworks Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Pinney & Boyle Co. v. Los Angeles Gas & Electric Corp.California Supreme Court · 1914
- Ladner v. LadnerMississippi Supreme Court · 1968
- St. Paul Book & Stationery Co. v. St. Paul Gaslight Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1915
- Homestead Co. v. Des Moines Electric Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1918
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.