Key v. Cross
Mississippi Supreme Court
In error from the circuit court of Tishamingo county; Hon. Hugh R. Miller, judge. The facts of the case will be found sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court. .Two writings executed at the same time in relation to the same subject-matter have, in many instances, been deemed one instrument, with a view to the construction of either. 2 Notes to Phil. E’v. by C. & H. 1421, and cases cited.
Read the full summary
In error from the circuit court of Tishamingo county; Hon. Hugh R. Miller, judge. The facts of the case will be found sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court. .Two writings executed at the same time in relation to the same subject-matter have, in many instances, been deemed one instrument, with a view to the construction of either. 2 Notes to Phil. E’v. by C. & H. 1421, and cases cited. The memorandum itself, as indorsed on the note, was of itself conclusive evidence to the jury that the defendants in the court below were released from any individual liability upon the instrument sued…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Smith
This was an action of debt founded upon a sealed note executed by plaintiffs in error, who at the time of its execution *599were the administrator and administratrix, with the will annexed, of Ezekiel Key, deceased.
The defendants filed four special pleas in bar of the action, setting up substantially the same ground of defence, which was, that at the time of the execution of the bill single, upon which the suit was brought, one of the plaintiffs made the following indorsement in writing, upon the said instrument, to wit: “ Memorandum'— The within note is not binding on G. W. Key and Jane Ann Key…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Jones v. FalesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1808
- Williams v. HandleyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1813
3Cited by2 opinions
- Johnston Bros. v. Village of CoopersvilleMichigan Supreme Court · 1932
- Canal Bank & Trust Co. v. BrewerMississippi Supreme Court · 1927