Holden v. Rice Mercantile Co.

51 So. 895, 96 Miss. 425
Mississippi Supreme Court·Decided March 15, 1910·Published

Opinion

Whitfield, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

It was fatal error to give a charge that the jury could only-find for the appellants, the plaintiffs below, to the extent of $15,. the amount of attorney’s fee. Whether the landlord’s lien had been waived by Mrs. Holden should have gone to the jury on the-testimony in the case, and, as involved in this, the right of the-plaintiffs to recover the value of the seven hundred forty-six pounds of lint cotton which the appellee admitted it had. We-concur with the learned court below that, on the testimony in the record now before us, the plaintiffs were not entitled to recover any more than the $15 attorney’s fee and the value of the said seven hundred forty-six pounds of lint cotton, with interest thereon; but the charge given was, in effect, a peremptory charge-to find for the defendants as to the value of this lint cotton.

Wherefore the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded..

Reversed.

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

Holden v. Rice Mercantile Co., 51 So. 895, 96 Miss. 425 (Mich. 1910).

51 So. 895 (Holden v. Rice Mercantile Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.