Kelly v. Brooks
Mississippi Supreme Court
Appeal from the Chancery Court of Montgomery County. Hon. R. W. WilliamsoN, Chancellor. The decree of this court, on sustaining the decree which overruled the demurrer, allowed the defendant who appealed sixty days to answer; but the one who did not appeal was not before this court, and cannot take the benefit of a decree which, if it attempted to affect him, would be pro tanto void.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Chancery Court of Montgomery County. Hon. R. W. WilliamsoN, Chancellor. The decree of this court, on sustaining the decree which overruled the demurrer, allowed the defendant who appealed sixty days to answer; but the one who did not appeal was not before this court, and cannot take the benefit of a decree which, if it attempted to affect him, would be pro tanto void. While the complainant can take no final decree against Brooks until the case is determined as to the other defendants, Minor v. Stewart, 2 How. 912; Hargrove v. Martin, 6 S. & M. 61; yet, by failing to answer,…
1Opinion of the CourtChalmers, J.
The bill was filed against several defendants, all of whom demurred. The demurrer was overruled and the defendants required to answer within sixty days. Only one of them appealed to this court. The decree below was affirmed, and he was given sixty days more within which to answer. Thereafter pro confesso at rules was taken against Brooks, one qf the defendants who had not appealed. This was done more than sixty days after the decree in the lower court, but within less than sixty days after the decree in this court. The day after the decree pro confesso before the clerk was entered, Brooks…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Dorsey v. SullivanMississippi Supreme Court · 1946
- Robbins v. BerryMississippi Supreme Court · 1950
- Soria v. StoweMississippi Supreme Court · 1889
- Kennedy v. East Union Lumber & Manufacturing Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1908
- Last Will & Testament of Francis v. FrancisMississippi Supreme Court · 1982