Koen v. Brill
Mississippi Supreme Court
Feom the chancery court of Warren county. Hon. Claude Pintaed, Chancellor. The opinion states the case. 1. We invoke the rule of marshaling securities. 1 Story’s Eq., secs. 558, 633; 14 Am. & Eng. Ene. L., 685, note 4; Gheeseborough v. Millard, 1 John. Ch., 409, 412; Kausler v. Ford, 47 Miss., 289, 301. 2. In most of the states marshaling may take place where homestead land is involved.
Read the full summary
Feom the chancery court of Warren county. Hon. Claude Pintaed, Chancellor. The opinion states the case. 1. We invoke the rule of marshaling securities. 1 Story’s Eq., secs. 558, 633; 14 Am. & Eng. Ene. L., 685, note 4; Gheeseborough v. Millard, 1 John. Ch., 409, 412; Kausler v. Ford, 47 Miss., 289, 301. 2. In most of the states marshaling may take place where homestead land is involved. Parr v. Fumbanks (Tenn.), 11 Lea, 391; Jones v. Bow, 18 Wis., 241 (253); White v. Pol-leys, 20 Wis., 503; In re Santhoff, 7 Bis., 167; State Savings Bank v. Hiwbin, 18 S. C., 425; People's B. c& L. A. v.…
1Opinion of the CourtTerral, J.
The appellants obtained, in the court of a justice of the peace of Warren county, a judgment against the appellee for §196.95, and levied the execution issued thereon upon the homestead of the appellee, a residence and lot in the city of Vicksburg, of the value of §6,000. Appellee enjoined the sale of the premises, under the execution, on the alleged grounds that the homestead was incumbered by debts, with equitable liens to the amount of §4,400, and that the sole effect of a sale of the premises, under the judgment, would be to “ cast a cloud upon her title and destroy all her rights of…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Dickson v. ChornSupreme Court of Iowa · 1858
- Hodges v. HickeyMississippi Supreme Court · 1890
3Cited by4 opinions
- Dogan, Sheriff v. CooleyMississippi Supreme Court · 1939
- Hays v. BarlowMississippi Supreme Court · 1910
- McMillan v. AruCourt of Appeals of Mississippi · 2000
- Dogan, Sheriff v. CooleyMississippi Supreme Court · 1939