Bowers v. Virden

56 Miss. 595
CourtMississippi Supreme Court
DecidedApril 15, 1879
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 56 Miss. 595 (Bowers v. Virden) 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
Bowers v. Virden, 56 Miss. 595 (Mich. 1879).

Opinion

Campbell, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

At the time of the delinquency of the land, and its sale for taxes, the appellant did not sustain such a professional relation to appellee, as to the subject of the sale, as to disable him to purchase at said sale for himself. The fact that appellant had written the will of appellee, which disposed of this land, and that he had been consulted, in the autumn of 1871, about collecting rent for the use of said land that year, did not preclude him from buying it at the sale for taxes. His duty as to the will terminated with its preparation ; and in advising as to the collection of rent, he incurred no continuing obligation as to the land. His employment in these matters, or in others not connected with the land, imposed no obligation on him to protect the interest of appellee by preventing a sale of the land for taxes.

There was no litigation about the land. He had no charge, or trust, or confidence as to it. He owed no duty to appellee in reference to it. He could not buy for himself an outstanding title existing when he wrote the will, but there was no' hindrance to his buying the paramount title subsequently arising from the non-payment of taxes and the sale of the land therefor. He could not do any thing inconsistent with his duty to his client, as to the matters about which he was consulted ; but his duty as to this land was not a continuing one, and had ended before the claim of the State to sell it arose. He could not use for his own advantage information acquired [601]*601in bis professional employment, but such disability could have no application to the sale of the land for taxes, which was the act of the State, wholly independent of any agency of appellant, and unaffected by any knowledge he may have had, and which transferred the title, in whomsoever it was.

Decree reversed and bill dismissed.

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

Related

Day v. Cowart
54 So. 2d 385 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1951)
Kauder v. Lautman
168 A. 660 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1933)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
56 Miss. 595, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bowers-v-virden-miss-1879.