Tatum v. Bonner
Mississippi Supreme Court
In error from the circuit court of Marshall county; Hon. Hugh R. Miller, judge. The facts of the case are contained in the opinion of the court. In Brown v. Curtis, 2 Comst. 227, the court say, “ I do not mean that the very words of an agreement are always to be followed. Construction is often necessary to ascertain what the parties intended by the wo.rds which they used..
Read the full summary
In error from the circuit court of Marshall county; Hon. Hugh R. Miller, judge. The facts of the case are contained in the opinion of the court. In Brown v. Curtis, 2 Comst. 227, the court say, “ I do not mean that the very words of an agreement are always to be followed. Construction is often necessary to ascertain what the parties intended by the wo.rds which they used.. But when the meaning of an instrument has been ascertained, the office of construction is at an end, and the contract can only be enforced as the parties have made it,” &c. This was a case of guaranty, and the reasoning of…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Fisher
*765This is a writ of error to the judgment of the circuit court of Marshall county.
The suit was brought against the defendant below-as administrator of the estate of Samuel D. Martin, upon a special assignment made by the deceased of a promissory note, made by E. F. Buckner. The assignment is in these words, namely: “ I assign this note to Cook & Holland, and indorse the prompt payment of it. March 16, 1848. S. D. Martin.” The counsel for the plaintiffs below asked ■ the court to give the following instruction to the jury, “ that the words ‘ I assign this note to Cook & Holland, and. indorse the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Delamater v. KearnsAppellate Court of Illinois · 1890
- Quinn v. AlexanderMississippi Supreme Court · 1921