Gambrell v. Southern Moline Plow Co.

Mississippi Supreme Court

Gambrell v. Southern Moline Plow Co.

60 So. 1012, 103 Miss. 824

Mississippi Supreme Court·Decided October 15, 1912·Published

Opinion

Smith, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

If the evidence introduced on behalf of appellant in the court below be true, he neither authorized, ratified, nor received any benefit from the agreement entered into by his attorneys in the bankruptcy proceeding with the attorneys representing appellee, upon which agreement this suit is predicated.

The court therefore erred in granting the peremptory instruction requested by appellee, and its judgment is reversed, and cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

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

Smith, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

If the evidence introduced on behalf of appellant in the court below be true, he neither authorized, ratified, nor received any benefit from the agreement entered into by his attorneys in the bankruptcy proceeding with the attorneys representing appellee, upon which agreement this suit is predicated.

The court therefore erred in granting the peremptory instruction requested by appellee, and its judgment is reversed, and cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

Gambrell v. Southern Moline Plow Co., 60 So. 1012, 103 Miss. 824 (Mich. 1912).

Pincite

60 So. 1012 (Gambrell v. Southern Moline Plow Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.