Fry v. Prewett
Mississippi Supreme Court
Appeal from the Chancery Court of Pike County. Hon. T. Y. Berry, Chancellor. The case is stated in the opinion of the court. The parol evidence should have been considered, to establish the connection between the note and quitclaim, and its exclusion was error.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Chancery Court of Pike County. Hon. T. Y. Berry, Chancellor. The case is stated in the opinion of the court. The parol evidence should have been considered, to establish the connection between the note and quitclaim, and its exclusion was error. The King v. The Inhabitants of iScammonden, 3 Term Rep. 474 ; 2 Greenl. on Ev., sect. 26 ; 3 id., sect. 360'; Jackson v. Pike, 9 Cow. 69; Marsh v. Lisle, 34 Miss. 173; Blake v. Morrison, 33 Miss. 123; Auding v. Davis, 38 Miss. 576 ; Pegues v. Mosby, 7 Smed. & M. 340. The defendant having possession of the land, and not having paid for…
1Opinion of the CourtChalmers, J.
Appellant, Pry, bought from Prewett certain real estate in the town of Magnolia, for the sum of $3,000, receiving a deed and taking possession. Having owned and occupied it for three years, and having paid the greater part of the purchase-money, but being unable or unwilling to pay the remainder, he sold it back to his vendor for the amount due and for the additional sum of $350, for which fatter sum Prewett executed his note.
The deed which Pry held had never been recorded, and the parties supposed that no formal reconveyance was necessary, but that their scheme could be effected by a release…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Rogers Dev. Co. v. Southern California Real Estate Inv. Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
- Pruitt Office MacHines, Inc. v. Liberty National Bank of ChicagoAppellate Court of Illinois · 1950