Myers v. Buchanan
Mississippi Supreme Court
Appeal from the chancery court of Chickasaw county. 1. If the record book in which the deed had been recorded had been consumed by fire, the lien of Myers was not impaired. The Code, p. 359, articles 311, 314, vested Myers with certain rights when he complied with the registration laws. The statute did not contemplate a destruction of the public records, and hence that contingency is not provided for in the Code.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the chancery court of Chickasaw county. 1. If the record book in which the deed had been recorded had been consumed by fire, the lien of Myers was not impaired. The Code, p. 359, articles 311, 314, vested Myers with certain rights when he complied with the registration laws. The statute did not contemplate a destruction of the public records, and hence that contingency is not provided for in the Code. It is true subsequent legislation provided for supplying the loss of burnt records, but that legislation did not assume to divest rights which had previously prevailed, as is plainly…
1Opinion of the Court
Tabbelu, J. :
Simon Myers, complainant, in 1868, filed his bill of complaint in the chancery court of Chickasaw county, against Thomas J. Buchanan, to recover the value of the lumber, materials, machinery, etc., constituting a saw and grist-mill, located upon the land of defendant, together with a share of the profits of said mill, in the-possession of the defendant, *412and to Rave conveyed to Mm the interest of one Brownlee, in the mill and in certain lands whereon the said mill is located, under a contract between Brownlee and Buchanan. From the arguments of the several counsel, the case turned…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Henderson v. DowningCourt of Appeals of Mississippi · 1852
- Harper v. TapleyMississippi Supreme Court · 1858
- Otley v. Haviland, Clark & Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1858
3Cited by2 opinions
- Deming v. MilesNebraska Supreme Court · 1892
- Myers v. ViverettMississippi Supreme Court · 1915