Yarbrough v. Gilland Bros.
Mississippi Supreme Court
EeoM the circuit court of Winston county. IToN. GreeN B. HuudlestoN, Judge. Gilland Brothers, appellees, were plaintiffs 'in the court below: the appellant, Yarbrough, ivas defendant there.
Read the full summary
EeoM the circuit court of Winston county. IToN. GreeN B. HuudlestoN, Judge. Gilland Brothers, appellees, were plaintiffs 'in the court below: the appellant, Yarbrough, ivas defendant there. The new promise relied upon by plaintiffs was in form a letter to Tones Gilland, one of the plaintiffs, the managing partner of the plaintiff firm, and it was in words following: “PuattsbuRGj Miss., March 7, 1896. ‘■'Mr. Jones Gilland — • “Dear Sir and Kind Friend: “T feel like I ought to do something for yon. I would hare paid yon before now but T iras not in shape to do it. Mr. Lee has been here three or…
1Opinion of the CourtTerral, J.
On the twenty-third day of January'-, 1897, Gilland Brothers, a firm composed of Jones Gilland, and J. W. and S. N. Gilland, brought suit on an open account for $145.80, due the first day of January, 1894, against Moses 35. Yarbrough. Yarbrough pleaded the statute of limitation of three yrears, and to avoid said plea, the plaintiff replied a new promise in writing of March 7, IS96.
The account sued on, among other articles, was for 8,000 pounds of bone dust charged at $110, and the three last items of the account aggregated $9.60; the letter containing the alleged new promise was address to…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Dyer v. LoweMississippi Supreme Court · 1947
- Taylor v. De Soto Lumber Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1924