Anderson v. Leland
Mississippi Supreme Court
Eeeob to the circuit court of Pontotoc county. Cabe, J. The facts of this case, out of which arose the particular question discussed and decided by the court, sufficiently appear in the arguments of counsel and the opinion of the court. Defendant in error sued on an open account, and the pleas were non assumpsit and payment.
Read the full summary
Eeeob to the circuit court of Pontotoc county. Cabe, J. The facts of this case, out of which arose the particular question discussed and decided by the court, sufficiently appear in the arguments of counsel and the opinion of the court. Defendant in error sued on an open account, and the pleas were non assumpsit and payment. Anderson, the defendant, offered evidence to prove that neither Leland nor Ms usee Rad any interest in the suit, and also that Leland was a discharged bankrupt. The court excluded the evidence upon the ground that it was not admissible under the pleadings. As we learn,…
1Opinion of the Court
Simrall, J. :
Suit was brought by W. W, Leland for the use of Miller to recover a sum of money, due by open account, for goods sold and delivered. On the trial the defendant offered testimony tending to prove that neither Leland nor the usee had interest in the subject of the suit. The refusal of the court to admit the testimony was the ground of the motion for new trial, and is the first assignment of error in this court. We have recently examined the general subject, and there cannot be a doubt that the plaintiff, in a court of law, must be clothed with the legal title to the chose-in…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Musson v. LakeSupreme Court of the United States · 1846
3Cited by1 opinion
- Martin v. Yazoo Delta Mortgage Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1928