Watts v. Gunn
Mississippi Supreme Court
Appeal from the Chancery Court of Monroe County. Hon. L. Haughton, Chancellor. 1. The bill is not one to remove clouds alone; but it is to establish the equitable title of the complainants to the land, and therefore the grounds of demurrer, that the complainants do not show title and the like, are inapplicable. 7 Johns. Ch. 114; 12 S. & M. 191. 2. The complainants are not barred. There was no concurrent jurisdiction of this cause in a court of law.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Chancery Court of Monroe County. Hon. L. Haughton, Chancellor. 1. The bill is not one to remove clouds alone; but it is to establish the equitable title of the complainants to the land, and therefore the grounds of demurrer, that the complainants do not show title and the like, are inapplicable. 7 Johns. Ch. 114; 12 S. & M. 191. 2. The complainants are not barred. There was no concurrent jurisdiction of this cause in a court of law. It is a trust cognizable peculiarly in a court of equity. Ward acquired, by his purchase of the title-bond from Vance’s administrator, a mortgage…
1Opinion of the CourtChalmers, J.
Mrs. Mary E. Watts, née Parchman, and her minor sister, Lucy Parchman, grandchildren of George W. Vance, deceased, and Mrs. Alice E. Ransom, daughter of said decedent, filed this bill to recover certain lands in Monroe County, which had belonged to their ancestor, and which had been improperly aliened by his administrator. It appears from the allegations of the bill that Vance in his lifetime bought the lands from one Sykes, receiving a title-bond. He made two payments, but died without having made the third and last. After his death his administrator, “ under the pretended authority of a…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Prewett v. BuckinghamMississippi Supreme Court · 1854
- Livermore v. JohnsonMississippi Supreme Court · 1854
- Edwards v. IngrahamMississippi Supreme Court · 1856