Legal Opinion · Dissent

Lee v. Lee

Mississippi Supreme Court

Decided June 9, 1924No. 23947Published

1DissentSmith, C. J.

I concur in what is said in the opinion in chief, except that on the motion to quash the writ of supersedeas, and am of the opinion, in which Judges Cook and Sykes concur, that the court below erred in not sustaining that motion. The claim sued on is a pure legal demand and the appellee does not and could not successfully assert any claim to or lien on the money which has come into the hands of Wasson, commissioner, by virtue of the sale by him of the property in which the appellant has an interest, consequently the case is not one wherein a writ of sequestration is authorized.

It is said in…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Advance Lumber Co. v. Laurel National BankMississippi Supreme Court · 1905
  2. Dean v. BoydMississippi Supreme Court · 1905

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

Powered by the Exa API