Massey v. Rimmer

Mississippi Supreme Court

Massey v. Rimmer

69 Miss. 667

CourtMississippi Supreme Court

DecidedApril 15, 1892

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 69 Miss. 667 (Massey v. Rimmer) 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

Massey v. Rimmer, 69 Miss. 667 (Mich. 1892).

Pincite

Opinion

Campbell, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

D. B. Massey, in his life-time, having erased his name from the deed which vested title in him, and inserted his wife’s name in the deed instead of his own, for the purpose of vesting the title in her, and she having held the land as owner by virtue of ’this arrangement, the statute of limitations commenced to run in her favor in the life-time of her husband, and continued uninterrupted by his death, and, after the lapse of ten years, perfected her title as against the heirs of her deceased husband. Hartman v. Nettles, 64 Miss., 495.

Affirmed.

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

Campbell, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

D. B. Massey, in his life-time, having erased his name from the deed which vested title in him, and inserted his wife’s name in the deed instead of his own, for the purpose of vesting the title in her, and she having held the land as owner by virtue of ’this arrangement, the statute of limitations commenced to run in her favor in the life-time of her husband, and continued uninterrupted by his death, and, after the lapse of ten years, perfected her title as against the heirs of her deceased husband. Hartman v. Nettles, 64 Miss., 495.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

69 Miss. 667, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/massey-v-rimmer-miss-1892.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack