Irion v. Cole
This text of 78 Miss. 132 (Irion v. Cole) 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.
Irion filed his bill in chancery to enforce his vendor’s lien for payment of money due on Cole’s promissory note for the purchase money for land. Cole, in defense, set up payment, and, also, by way of cross bill, as set-off, that Irion owed her more than the sum unpaid on other transactions, specifying them, and prayed for an accounting and decree for the balance. Irion demurred to this cross bill, because it introduced new and distinct matter not germane to the complaint in the bill, and [134]*134matters of purely legal demand, for which the cross complainant had full, adequate and complete remedy at law. This demurrer was overruled', and Irion appeals to settle the principles of the case.
While we should' sustain the action of the court below on general principles, we must sustain it on the construction of section 147 of our constitution, announced in the case of Cazeneuve v. Curell, 70 Miss., 521.
Affirmed, allowing sixty days to complainant to answer the cross hill.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
78 Miss. 132, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/irion-v-cole-miss-1900.