Legal Opinion

Schoenlau-Steiner Trunk Top & Veneer Co. v. Hilderbrand

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided April 6, 1925PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Chambliss

This court is without jurisdiction of the instant case, unless it is one involving a constitutional question.

The bill was filed by a landlord against his tenant, charging that defendant, Bailey-Ball-Pumphrey, having made advancements to the tenant, pursuant to an agreement with the landlord to waive its landlord’s lien, had taken possession of the cotton crop of the tenant and con - verted it in disregard of the landlord’s rent lien rights, the dispute between the parties, forming the determinative issue involved in the litigation being as to the effect of the said agreement and the extent of…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Mooney v. HicksTennessee Supreme Court · 1920
  2. Lexington Compress Oil Mill Co. v. Johnston & Jennings Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1921

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Williams v. Realty Development Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1930
  2. Haynes v. SanfordTennessee Supreme Court · 1947
  3. Howard v. Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Railway Co.Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 1926

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

Powered by the Exa API