Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Suman Corp. v. Warren

Mississippi Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1989No. 07-58243Published

1ConcurrenceRobertson, Justice

The majority suggests that Suman Corporation’s claim for injunction fails because of the weakness of its title to Office Plaza Drive. This strikes me as odd, for I see no weakness. That Suman holds under a quitclaim deed is not a source of weakness. A quitclaim deed conveys title as effectively as a warranty deed. Owen v. Potts, 149 Miss. 205, 211, 115 So. 336, 338 (1928); Chapman v. Sims 53 Miss. 154, 169 (1876); 1 Devlin, Real Estate § 27, p. 42, n. 8 (3d ed. 1911); Miss.Code Ann. §§ 89-1-37, -39 (1972). That the deed excepts identifiable interests is of no concern unless reliance on one of…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Comet Delta, Inc. v. Pate Stevedore Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Thornhill v. System Fuels, Inc.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1988
  3. Armstrong v. Itawamba CountyMississippi Supreme Court · 1944
  4. Chapman v. SimsMississippi Supreme Court · 1876
  5. COLEMAN, ATTY. GEN. v. ShippMississippi Supreme Court · 1955

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API