Vicksburg Waterworks & Banking Co. v. Washington
Mississippi Supreme Court
In error from the circuit court of Rankin county. The plaintiffs in error, sued the defendants in error, in the ordinary action of assumpsit, upon a joint promissory note for fourteen thousand dollars, made by William H. Washington, William H. Shelton, Samuel M. Puckett, and Fairfax Washington.
Read the full summary
In error from the circuit court of Rankin county. The plaintiffs in error, sued the defendants in error, in the ordinary action of assumpsit, upon a joint promissory note for fourteen thousand dollars, made by William H. Washington, William H. Shelton, Samuel M. Puckett, and Fairfax Washington. The defendants appeared, and filed ten pleas, which were the subject of lengthy discussion in this court, but inasmuch as the court decided the case entirely upon the first plea, it is not deemed necessary to notice either the other pleadings, or the arguments of counsel with reference to them. The…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Clayton
This is a cause in which the merits are kept out of view, by the state of the pleadings. It is an action of assumpsit, brought upon a promissory note payable to the plaintiffs, for $14000; a number of pleas were filed, some of which were demurred to, and replications put in to others. It will not be necessary to notice these in detail, but only such of them as are material to the decision.
Amongst others, the defendants filed the plea of non-assumpsit, to which an affidavit in the due'form was annexed, denying that the plaintiff is a corporation having power to sue. To this plea there was a…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Thurlow v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1847
- Kendall v. StokesSupreme Court of the United States · 1845
- Utica Insurance v. CadwellNew York Supreme Court · 1829
- Musson v. LakeSupreme Court of the United States · 1846
- Bill v. President, Directors, & Co. of Fourth Great Western Turnpike RoadNew York Supreme Court · 1817