McNeill v. Roache
Mississippi Supreme Court
Appeal from tlie chancery court of Coahoma county. Hon. E. Staffobd, chancellor. The facts of this case are very fully set forth in the opinion of the court. It is assigned for error. 1. The court erred in refusing to discharge the attachment herein, and dismiss the bill on the motion of appellant. 2. The court erred in rendering the final decree herein rendered. The bill should have been dismissed.
Read the full summary
Appeal from tlie chancery court of Coahoma county. Hon. E. Staffobd, chancellor. The facts of this case are very fully set forth in the opinion of the court. It is assigned for error. 1. The court erred in refusing to discharge the attachment herein, and dismiss the bill on the motion of appellant. 2. The court erred in rendering the final decree herein rendered. The bill should have been dismissed. The attachment should have been discharged on motion of defendant in the court below. The bill was not sworn to, and the circumstances were not such as to authorize the issuance of the writ. Eev.…
1Opinion of the Court
PeytoN, 0. J.,
delivered the opinion of the court:
0. E. Roache as a creditor of Thomas H. McNeill, deceased, instituted his suit ■ in the chancery court, against Malcolm McNeill, as a non-resident of the State, by an attachment of the debt due by one 0. S. Severson to said non-resident. The bill alleges that the estate of Thomas H. McNeill is indebted to the complainant in the sum of $2,500.00, and interest. That W. G. Parks is administrator of said estate, which is insolvent, and that said Malcolm McNeill took and converted to his owii use an obligation of J. A..Mitchell and J. M. Hampton, to…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Travelers' Ins. Co. v. InmanMississippi Supreme Court · 1930
- Marquis v. N. Y. Life Ins. Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1952
- Ford v. Mut. L. Ins. Co. of N.Y.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1943