McClenden v. Whitten
Mississippi Supreme Court
From tbe circuit court of, first district, Tallahatchie county. Hon. Samuel C. Cook, Judge. MoClenden, appellant ,was plaintiff in the court below1; Whit-ten and others, appellees, were defendants there. From a judgment in defendant’s favor, plaintiff appealed to the supreme court. The suit was against Whitten, former clerk of the chancery court of the county, and the sureties on his official bond. The opinion of the court states the facts.
Read the full summary
From tbe circuit court of, first district, Tallahatchie county. Hon. Samuel C. Cook, Judge. MoClenden, appellant ,was plaintiff in the court below1; Whit-ten and others, appellees, were defendants there. From a judgment in defendant’s favor, plaintiff appealed to the supreme court. The suit was against Whitten, former clerk of the chancery court of the county, and the sureties on his official bond. The opinion of the court states the facts. Code 1906, § 4333, requires the clerk of the chancery court, within a specified time prior to the expiration of the period limited for redemption of land…
1Opinion of the Court
Mates, T.,
delivered the opinion of the court.
The agreed facts of this case show that a certain tract of land assessed to Mitchell & McClendon, a mercantile firm engaged in business in Tallahatchie county, was sold for taxes on the first Monday of March, 1905. At the date of the sale, and until the 31st day of December, 1907, Whitten, appellee, was the chancery clerk of the county. Though the property was assessed to, and sold as the property of Mitchell & McClendon, the tax title was allowed to mature without the chancery clerk giving the notice as required by section 4333, Code of 1906,…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Bank of Hickory v. MayMississippi Supreme Court · 1918
- City of Horn Lake, Mississippi v. Sass Muni-V, LLCMississippi Supreme Court · 2018
- State ex rel. Thomas v. WrayMississippi Supreme Court · 1918