Legal Opinion

Malvezzi v. Gully

Mississippi Supreme Court

Decided January 22, 1940No. 33961PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The pleadings in this case are almost precisely the same as in the case of Noe et al. v. J.B. Gully, 189 Miss. 1, 193 So. 36, this day decided. Consequently the attempted denials as to the place described in the bill, where the intoxicating liquors were possessed and sold, and other allegations, are insufficient, and do not put the plaintiff to the proof as to those particulars; and they stand as though confessed under section 380 of the Code of 1930, which provides that, "The defendant shall answer fully all the allegations of the bill without being specially interrogated. All matters of…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. McAllister v. CloptonMississippi Supreme Court · 1875
  2. Mead v. DayMississippi Supreme Court · 1876
  3. Illinois Central R. v. WalkerMississippi Supreme Court · 1917
  4. Noe v. GullyMississippi Supreme Court · 1940
  5. Colbert v. HenleyMississippi Supreme Court · 1886

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Hassie Hunt Trust v. ProctorMississippi Supreme Court · 1952
  2. Bailey, State Tax Collector v. MuseMississippi Supreme Court · 1956
  3. Malvezzi v. GullyMississippi Supreme Court · 1940

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

Powered by the Exa API