Lazar v. Caston
Mississippi Supreme Court
From the circuit court of Amite county. Hon. J. B. Chrism an, Judge. The plaintiff, A. J. Lazar, instituted this ejectment suit against A. S. Caston, E. A. Caston and Mary E. Caston, to recover one hundred and sixty acres of land.
Read the full summary
From the circuit court of Amite county. Hon. J. B. Chrism an, Judge. The plaintiff, A. J. Lazar, instituted this ejectment suit against A. S. Caston, E. A. Caston and Mary E. Caston, to recover one hundred and sixty acres of land. The land is described in the declaration, and in the deeds under which plaintiff derives title as, “north part of S. W. J of lot 2, south half of lot 4, and seventy-eight acres in the south part of lot 5, of section 12, township 2, range 2 east,” and plaintiff claims as purchaser at a sale under execution against the defendants. The defendants pleaded not guilty,…
1Opinion of the CourtCooper, J.
The court properly refused the instructions asked by the plaintiff.
The first instruction is erroneous in so far as it announces the right of the plaintiff to recover the, “ north part of the southwest quarter of lot 2.” This description, which runs through the plaintiff’s declaration and chain of title, is void for uncertainty. It is *278impossible to determine whether one acre or forty is claimed, or where in the subdivision it is located.
The second instruction is erroneous in its assumption that the homestead exemption may be allotted in an action of ejectment. Homesteads are to be set apart by…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Langstaff v. Town of DurantMississippi Supreme Court · 1920
- Griffin v. LandMississippi Supreme Court · 1952
- Gilchrist-Fordney Co. v. ThigpenMississippi Supreme Court · 1917