Barrett v. Carter Bros. & Co.

Mississippi Supreme Court

Barrett v. Carter Bros. & Co.

69 Miss. 593

CourtMississippi Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 15, 1891

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 69 Miss. 593 (Barrett v. Carter Bros. & Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Mississippi Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Barrett v. Carter Bros. & Co., 69 Miss. 593 (Mich. 1891).

Pincite

Opinion

Cooper, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The bill having been dismissed as to the defendants, Sloan and Dulaney, they have no longer any interest in the litigation, and their motion to join in the appeal must be denied.

If there would otherwise have been merit in the objection taken to the jurisdiction of the court by the appellant, Barrett, it cannot now avail, for, by § 147 of the constitution, it is declared that “no judgment or decree in any chancery or circuit court, rendered in a civil cause, shall be reversed or annulled on the ground of want of jurisdiction to render said judgment or decree, from any error or mistake as to whether the cause in which it was rendered was of equity or common law jurisdiction.” There is no error in the decree,' as against Barrett, who alone appeals. He cannot assign for error matters affecting only the right of other defendants.

Decree affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cooper, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The bill having been dismissed as to the defendants, Sloan and Dulaney, they have no longer any interest in the litigation, and their motion to join in the appeal must be denied.

If there would otherwise have been merit in the objection taken to the jurisdiction of the court by the appellant, Barrett, it cannot now avail, for, by § 147 of the constitution, it is declared that “no judgment or decree in any chancery or circuit court, rendered in a civil cause, shall be reversed or annulled on the ground of want of jurisdiction to render said judgment or decree, from any error or mistake as to whether the cause in which it was rendered was of equity or common law jurisdiction.” There is no error in the decree,' as against Barrett, who alone appeals. He cannot assign for error matters affecting only the right of other defendants.

Decree affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

69 Miss. 593, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barrett-v-carter-bros-co-miss-1891.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack