Davis v. Fortenberry

75 So. 119, 114 Miss. 294
CourtMississippi Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 15, 1917
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 75 So. 119 (Davis v. Fortenberry) 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
Davis v. Fortenberry, 75 So. 119, 114 Miss. 294 (Mich. 1917).

Opinion

Smith, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The court below committed no error in holding that appellee has a right of way by necessarily over appellant Davis’ land (Pleas v. Thomas, 75 Miss. 495, 22 So. 820), but should not have enjoined the prosecution of the criminal proceeding begun in the court of the justice of the peace before appellee’s bill was filed (Crighton v. Dahmer, 70 Miss. 602, 13 So. 237, 21 L. R. A. 84, 35 Am. St. Rep. 66). The decree rendered in the court below will be set aside, and a decree rendered here in accordance with this opinion. Costs to be paid by appellants L. G-. and H. B. Davis.

Affirmed in part and reversed in part.

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

Related

Dantzler v. State
542 So. 2d 906 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1989)
Thornton v. McLeary
137 So. 785 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1931)
Plaza Amusement Co. v. Rothenberg
131 So. 350 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1930)
Missouri-Kansas-Texas Ry. Co. v. Cunningham
273 S.W. 697 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1925)
Edwards v. De Vance
103 So. 194 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1925)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
75 So. 119, 114 Miss. 294, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davis-v-fortenberry-miss-1917.