Phillips v. Wormley
Mississippi Supreme Court
Appeal from the Chancery Court of Tunica County. Hon. J. B. Morgan, Chancellor. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court. The court had no right to decide the cause upon the facts, and decree that complainant had not established the case presented by his bill, when the complainant had previously dismissed his bill before the clerk. The decree should be so modified as not to conclude the complainant or prejudice his rights in any other proceeding.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Chancery Court of Tunica County. Hon. J. B. Morgan, Chancellor. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court. The court had no right to decide the cause upon the facts, and decree that complainant had not established the case presented by his bill, when the complainant had previously dismissed his bill before the clerk. The decree should be so modified as not to conclude the complainant or prejudice his rights in any other proceeding. The complainant paid the costs and had an entry of dismissal made in vacation before the court had acted on the case. filed a…
1Opinion of the CourtGeorge, J.
After the cause was argued on final hearing, and whilst it was in the hands of the chancellor on submission, and during the vacation, the appellant went before the chancery clerk and dismissed his bill and paid the costs. Three days thereafter, the chancellor, knowing nothing of this dismissal, so far as the record shows, rendered his decree, also in vacation, dismissing the bill. The rendering of this decree after the voluntary dismissal by the appellant is now assigned for error; the appellant insisting that he had a right to have such a dismissal as would not have prevented his bringing…
2Cited by4 opinions
- DaCosta v. DibbleSupreme Court of Florida · 1898
- Thornton v. City of NatchezMississippi Supreme Court · 1906
- Germain v. HarwellMississippi Supreme Court · 1914
- Weathersby v. Pearl River Lumber Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1906