Wright v. Walton
Mississippi Supreme Court
Aureal from the Chancery Court of Hinds County. Hon. E. Gr. PeytoN, Chancellor. Lucy E. Wright and her husband, Hamilton Wright, filed their bill iu chancery against Sarah J. Walton and her husband, Charles A. Walton, for the purpose of subjecting certain lands belonging to Sarah J. Walton to the payment of a debt alleged to be due to Lucy E. Wright.
Read the full summary
Aureal from the Chancery Court of Hinds County. Hon. E. Gr. PeytoN, Chancellor. Lucy E. Wright and her husband, Hamilton Wright, filed their bill iu chancery against Sarah J. Walton and her husband, Charles A. Walton, for the purpose of subjecting certain lands belonging to Sarah J. Walton to the payment of a debt alleged to be due to Lucy E. Wright. The complainants filed as exhibits to their bill two promissory notes given by C. A. Walton to Lucy E. Wright, and copies of C. A. Walton’s accounts with H. Wright & Co., and with Wright & Edrington. The defendants answered ; and when the cause…
1Opinion of the CourtSimrall, C. J.
At the close of dealings between Hamilton Wright, a merchant at Vicksburg, and Charles Walton, his customer, two notes were given by the latter, payable (at the request of the former) to his wife, Lucy.
The accounts had extended through a period of several years, and were had with firms of which Hamilton Wright was a partner, and in part with himself, Stiles being his first associate, succeeded by Edrington. As these changes occurred, Walton’s account was transferred from one firm to another. At the date of the settlement, Wright represented to Walton *4that the connection between himself and…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Ligon v. BishopMississippi Supreme Court · 1871
- Shattuck v. DanielMississippi Supreme Court · 1876
3Cited by4 opinions
- Bricker v. Rollins & JareckiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
- Harmon v. MageeMississippi Supreme Court · 1879
- Wofford v. HooperTennessee Supreme Court · 1923
- In re WareFlorida Public Service Commission · 1956