Hunter v. Stanford
This text of 22 So. 2d 166 (Hunter v. Stanford) 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.
Opinion
delivered the opinion of the court.
On a former day we dismissed the appeal herein without an opinion, first, as to the guardian because it is an attempt to appeal from an order which he, as guardian, petitioned the court to make, and which therefore was by his consent, see Sec. 1147, Code 1942; 4 C. J. S. Appeal and Error, Sec. 213, pp. 404, 405; and, second, as to the other proposed appellants, because they were not parties to the proceedings sought to be reviewed. Farmers & Merchants Bank v. Rushing, 175 Miss. 826, 831, 167 So. 784. For the same reasons, we decline to reinstate. It may be that those now complaining may have some recourse, as to which we express no opinion, but it is not by appeal.
Motion overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
22 So. 2d 166, 198 Miss. 299, 1945 Miss. LEXIS 196, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hunter-v-stanford-miss-1945.