Howell v. Miller
Mississippi Supreme Court
From the chancery court of Yazoo county. Hon. Robert B. Mates, Chancellor. Howell, the appellant, was complainant in the court below; Miller and others, the appellees, were defendants there. From a decree sustaining defendants’ demurrer to the bill of complaint and, complainant not asking to amend, dismissing the suit, the complainant appealed to the supreme court.
Read the full summary
From the chancery court of Yazoo county. Hon. Robert B. Mates, Chancellor. Howell, the appellant, was complainant in the court below; Miller and others, the appellees, were defendants there. From a decree sustaining defendants’ demurrer to the bill of complaint and, complainant not asking to amend, dismissing the suit, the complainant appealed to the supreme court. The land in controversy was patented by the United States to the state of Mississippi in 1855 as swamp and overflowed land. In January, 19 01, the state land commissioner, on behalf of the state, executed a deed purporting to…
1Opinion of the CourtCalhoon, J.
The “swamp and overflowed” lands were never the subject of taxation and sale for nonpayment. Not being subject to any tax, any assessment and sale of them had no warrant in law, and the purchaser acquired no right against the state, or the state’s vendee, who bought with the warrant of the law for their especial sale.
Affirmed.
2Cited by4 opinions
- Kennedy v. SandersMississippi Supreme Court · 1907
- Creegan v. HymanMississippi Supreme Court · 1908
- Dees v. KingmanMississippi Supreme Court · 1918
- Partee v. VanceMississippi Supreme Court · 1912