Carradine v. Wilson
61 Miss. 573
Opinion
delivered the opinion of the court.
Each of the notes executed by the appellants was for a sum greater than the amount due for liquors. The holder could therefore apply all the unlawful considerations to one of them and recover on the other. Zundt v. Roberts, 5 Serg. & Rawle 139 ; Warren v. Chapman, 105 Mass. 87; Crookshank v. Rose, 5 C. & P. 19. Cited and approved in Cotten v. McKenzie, 57 Miss. 418. The moi’tgage was given to secure each of the notes and may be enforced for the payment of that note on which a recovery could be had at law.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Carradine v. Wilson, 61 Miss. 573 (Mich. 1884).
61 Miss. 573 (Carradine v. Wilson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
First Union Trust & Sav. Bank v. Mississippi Power Co.
150 So. 381 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1933)
Conradt v. Lepper
80 P. 307 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1905)
State v. Wilson
80 P. 639 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1905)