Riley v. James
Mississippi Supreme Court
Prom the circuit court of Holmes county. Hon. C. H. Campbell, Judge. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiff appealed. The opinion states the case. The town marshal of Tchula had no authority, as constable, the execute the distress warrant without the limits of the supervisor’s district in which that town is located, and the purchaser at his sale thereunder acquired no title. Const. 1869, § 23 of art. 6; const. 1890, § 171; Heggiev. Stone, 70 Miss., 41.
1Opinion of the CourtCooper, C. J.
Of the many errors assigned, we notice one only, because it goes to the root of the controversy between the parties, and must finally control the litigation.
The action is one in replevin, brought by the appellant to recover the possession of two mules from the appellee. It is conceded that the mules were the property of appellant, the appellee claiming to have procured title thereto by virtue of a distress for rent sued out by him against appellee, and a sale thereunder, at which he. the appellant, became the purchaser. Unless, therefore, the sale was a valid one, the appellant should prevail…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Bell v. McKinneyMississippi Supreme Court · 1885
- Heggie v. StoneMississippi Supreme Court · 1892
- Smith v. JonesMississippi Supreme Court · 1887
- Dolbear v. Town of HancockSupreme Court of Vermont · 1847
3Cited by8 opinions
- Ex parte FritzMississippi Supreme Court · 1905
- Clark v. HoldenMississippi Supreme Court · 1941
- Farrar v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1941
- Boutwell v. GraysonMississippi Supreme Court · 1918
- Ivy v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1925
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.