Dillard v. Brenner
Mississippi Supreme Court
From the circuit court of the second district of Coahoma county. Hon. R. W. Williamson, Judge. The opinion states the case. The code of 1892 establishes as a ground of attachment the dealing in, buying or selling, directly or indirectly, future contracts or futures. Section 129 (9). Further than that, the statutes make the act criminal, and punish it by fine and imprisonment.
Read the full summary
From the circuit court of the second district of Coahoma county. Hon. R. W. Williamson, Judge. The opinion states the case. The code of 1892 establishes as a ground of attachment the dealing in, buying or selling, directly or indirectly, future contracts or futures. Section 129 (9). Further than that, the statutes make the act criminal, and punish it by fine and imprisonment. Code 1892, §§ 1120, 1121. The interdiction of the law is still further extended, and no action in the courts of this state can be maintained for the enforcement of any contract of the character alluded to. Code 1892, §…
1Opinion of the CourtCooper, C. J.
Accepting as true the testimony delivered by the defendant himself, the court should have given the peremptory charge for the plaintiffs in attachment.
The defendant, within six months next before the suing out of the attachment, gave to one Wildberger a sum of money, and instructed him to invest the same in the purchase of “ cotton futures,” which Wildberger did. The defendant now says that in regard to this transaction he was acting as the agent for one Dreyfus, and therefore Dreyfus, and not he, was the dealer in the contract for “ futures.” But it is conceded that Wildberger was not…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Ritcher v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1885