Pankey v. Howard
Mississippi Supreme Court
Appeal from the chancery court of Holmes county. Henry, J. The decree rendered in this cause is erroneous, on account of the manner in which the process was executed on the defendants. In the case of Robertson v. Johnson, 40 Miss, page 500, the decree was held erroneous because the process was returned “ executed,” and such is the return in this case.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the chancery court of Holmes county. Henry, J. The decree rendered in this cause is erroneous, on account of the manner in which the process was executed on the defendants. In the case of Robertson v. Johnson, 40 Miss, page 500, the decree was held erroneous because the process was returned “ executed,” and such is the return in this case. By reference to the record, it will appear that no notice was- served on the defendants of the taking ol the depositions ; this is also error,.because a decree cannot be taken against infants, especially, without some proof of the allegations in…
1Opinion of the Court
SlMRALL, J.:
The bill was filed for the purpose of selling two parcels of land, and the allegation that partition could not be conveniently made, and that it would be for the benefit of the owners that both should be sold together in one body. These tracts, whilst distinct, were adjoining, and united would make a valuable property, and would produce more money at a sale in a body, than separately.
One parcel containing two hundred and forty acres, is the property of the heirs of Washington Stanfill. Martha Howard inherited one-fourth, the other three-fourths were respectively inherited by heirs…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Arnold v. MyliusWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1921
- Middelcoff v. CroniseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
- Shoup v. CumminsIllinois Supreme Court · 1929
- Belew v. JonesMississippi Supreme Court · 1879
- Cuevas v. CuevasMississippi Supreme Court · 1927
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.