Yerger v. Foote
Mississippi Supreme Court
Appeal from the chancery court of Washington county. Trimble, Chancellor. The facts necessary to a proper understanding of the case, appear in the opinion of the court. The chancery cpurt had no jurisdiction of the matter. The complainant had a valid legal claim against Harvey Miller’s estate that could have readily been enforced through the probate court, whose jurisdiction was full, adequate and complete.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the chancery court of Washington county. Trimble, Chancellor. The facts necessary to a proper understanding of the case, appear in the opinion of the court. The chancery cpurt had no jurisdiction of the matter. The complainant had a valid legal claim against Harvey Miller’s estate that could have readily been enforced through the probate court, whose jurisdiction was full, adequate and complete. Favre v. Graves, 4 S. & M. 707; Sheen v. Sheen, 25 Miss. 573; Powell v. Burruss, 35 ib. 615; 30 ib. 452; 26 ib. 70; 2 How. 856; 7 ib. 143; Pollock v. Buie, 43 Miss. 140; Story Eq. Jur., §…
1Opinion of the Court
Peyton, C. J.:
Harvey Miller was indebted, by note, to George W. Ward, which, at the close of the war, was renewed by Edward P. Johnson in his own name, as executor of the last will and testament of said Harvey Miller, deceased, and the new note was transferred for valuable consideration to John T. Foote, who recovered a judgment thereon at the November term, 1868, of the circuit court of Washington county, against the said Edward P. Johnson in his fiduciary capacity as executor of Harvey Miller, decased, for the sum of $19,578.72.
On said judgment, $5,000 have beén made under a decree of the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Woods v. RidleyMississippi Supreme Court · 1854
3Cited by3 opinions
- Brown v. FarnhamSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- Buckingham v. WalkerMississippi Supreme Court · 1875
- Daniel v. HodgeMississippi Supreme Court · 1939