Handy v. Noonan
Mississippi Supreme Court
Appeal from the Chancery Court of Madison County. Hon. Samuel Young, Chancellor. Complainants filed their bill to remove a cloud from their title to the land in controversy, and to have the legal title divested out of defendants and vested in complainants.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Chancery Court of Madison County. Hon. Samuel Young, Chancellor. Complainants filed their bill to remove a cloud from their title to the land in controversy, and to have the legal title divested out of defendants and vested in complainants. The litigation arises from what is admitted to be a void- sale of the land in controversy, under a decree in the probate court, in January, 1853. John Stone and his wife Eliza Stone were the guardians of A. E.' Collins, Margaret S. Collins and Mary J. Collins, children of Mrs. Stone by a former marriage. The minors were owners by descent…
1Opinion of the CourtSimrall, J.
It is conceded by counsel that the sale made by John Stone, Jr., and Eliza, his wife, guardians of Ann Eliza Collins, Margaret S. Collins and Mary Jane Collins, is void, and did not divest the wards of their title to the lands in controversy.
But it is contended by the appellant that by acts subsequent to the sale, done by the parties under whom the defendants claim, the sale was confirmed; or, in other terms, defendants are estopped in equity from holding and asserting title or any sort of right, except to a charge of one-sixth of the original purchase money and interest upon the land.
The…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Huntington v. AllenMississippi Supreme Court · 1870
- Lee v. GardinerMississippi Supreme Court · 1853
3Cited by11 opinions
- Burnett v. BassMississippi Supreme Court · 1929
- Lasoya Oil Co. v. ZulkeySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914
- Tomlinson v. SimpsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1885
- Gaines v. KennedyMississippi Supreme Court · 1876
- LaCotts v. QuertermousSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1907
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.