Alexander v. Smith
Mississippi Supreme Court
On appeal from the Lafayette circuit court. Reference is made to the opinion of the court for the facts. The first position assumed in this cause is, that the court below erred, in dismissing the bill of review of complainants, upon defendant coming in with answer denying the allegations contained in the bill of complainants, without awarding time to make proofs. All of which is fully shown by the state of the pleadings. See-How. and Hutch.
Read the full summary
On appeal from the Lafayette circuit court. Reference is made to the opinion of the court for the facts. The first position assumed in this cause is, that the court below erred, in dismissing the bill of review of complainants, upon defendant coming in with answer denying the allegations contained in the bill of complainants, without awarding time to make proofs. All of which is fully shown by the state of the pleadings. See-How. and Hutch. Dig., 472, secs. 17 and 18. That the complainants had placed themselves in a situation to receive the relief sought by their bill of review, is fully…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Clayton
This cause will have to be dismissed for want of jurisdiction, according to the repeated decisions of this court. The bond was made payable to the appellee, not to the probate judge, as the statute requires, and we can take no cognizance of it. We have, however, examined the record, and as there is nothing in it which would authorize a reversal of the decree, we thought it might be well to state the reasons why it must stand.
At the December term, 1842, of the probate court of Lafayette, the appellants filed their bill of review, in which they stated, that at the Juñe term, 1842, of said…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Smith v. KernochenSupreme Court of the United States · 1849
- Wright v. PetrieMississippi Chancery Courts · 1843