Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Chears Floor & Screen Co. v. Gidden

Mississippi Supreme Court

Decided December 15, 1930No. 28945Published

1Concurrence

Smith, O. J.,

delivered the concurring opinion.

I concur in tlie affirmance of the judgment of the court below, but not in the construction put on section 3060 of the Code of 1906, Hemingway’s Code 1927, section 2582, by my brethren. It appears from the petition that the appellant screened the doors and windows of a house owned by the appellee, at the request, and on the credit, of her husband, but without her written consent thereto. I will assume that screening doors and windows of a house is an alteration or repair thereof within the meaning of the statute. If the appellee’s husband is an…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Greenville Ice & Coal Co. v. City of GreenvilleMississippi Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Leinkauf & Strauss v. BarnesMississippi Supreme Court · 1888
  3. Anderson v. City of HattiesburgMississippi Supreme Court · 1922
  4. Planters' Lumber Co. v. TompkinsMississippi Supreme Court · 1916

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API