McClusky v. Trussel

44 So. 69, 90 Miss. 544
CourtMississippi Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 15, 1907
StatusPublished
Cited by36 cases

This text of 44 So. 69 (McClusky v. Trussel) 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
McClusky v. Trussel, 44 So. 69, 90 Miss. 544 (Mich. 1907).

Opinion

Wiiiteield, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The sale was manifestly void, because not made (Code 1892, § 2443) in conformity with the provisions of section 111 of the Constitution of 1890. W. W. Trussell testified: “Mr. J. B. Spencer bid the land off on first bid for the Frank estate. . Mr. Shaw sold the whole four hundred-tract in a lump.” Volney Weir testified: “The land was sold in a lump on the first bid.” The overwhelming weight of the testimony is to the effect, so far as the statute of limitations is concerned, that the purchaser did not enter into possession at the sale, nor within any time which would bar this action. The bill was filed August 30, 1905. The clear preponderance of the evidence- — its overwhelming weight, indeed — is to the effect that the appellees and those under whom they claim did not have possession of the land until some time in the year 1896.

The decree is reversed and the cause remanded, in accordance with this opinion.

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

Related

Department of Transportation v. Mid-Peninsula Realty Investment Group, LLC
171 So. 3d 771 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2015)
Medina v. Orange County
147 So. 2d 556 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)
Wash-Bowl Vending Co. v. No. 3 Condominium Ass'n, Village Green
485 So. 2d 1307 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)
Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. Department of Revenue
410 So. 2d 550 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)
Southside Atlantic Bank v. Lewis
174 So. 2d 470 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1965)
Boynton v. Harbison
135 So. 2d 234 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1961)
Texas Pacific Coal & Oil Co. v. Mulvihill
27 So. 2d 719 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1946)
Walton Land and Timber Co. v. Long
185 So. 839 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1939)
Baxter v. Thompson
184 So. 118 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1938)
Bringley v. C. I. T. Corporation
160 So. 680 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1935)
Gibson v. Longino
149 So. 592 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1933)
Gentile Bros. v. Bryan
133 So. 630 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1931)
Roux v. Houk
133 So. 853 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1931)
Griffith v. Hulion
107 So. 354 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1925)
Prescott v. J. S. Betts Co.
88 So. 385 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1921)
Clark ex rel. Townsend-Bower Co. v. Cochran
85 So. 250 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1920)
Walters v. Sheffield
78 So. 539 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1918)
Kelvin Lumber & Supply Co. v. Copper State Mining Co.
203 S.W. 68 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1918)
Stokes v. Humphries
68 So. 448 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1915)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
44 So. 69, 90 Miss. 544, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcclusky-v-trussel-miss-1907.