Legal Opinion

Runnels v. Fairchild

Mississippi Supreme Court

Decided November 8, 1948PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtRoberds, J.

Fairchild instituted this action of replevin to recover from Runnels the possession of a described motor then being used by Runnels in the operation of a sawmill. Runnels executed bond and retained possession of the motor. The jury found that Fairchild was entitled to possession of the motor and assessed its value at $700. Judgment was entered that Runnels either deliver possession of the motor to Fairchild or that Runnels and his sureties pay to Fairchild said amount. Runnels appeals.

The deciding question on this appeal is whether or not replevin will lie under the facts of this case.

The…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Kerl v. SmithMississippi Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Superior Laundry & Cleaners, Inc. v. American Laundry MacHinery Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1934

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Central Motor Exchange of Mississippi, Inc. v. ThompsonMississippi Supreme Court · 1970

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

Powered by the Exa API