Miller v. American National Bank

76 Miss. 84
Mississippi Supreme Court·Decided March 15, 1898·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Whitfield, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The damages for the breach of the warranty of the Lowry Hay & Grain Company arose out of contract, and were a valid set-off to any suit by the latter against appellant, and might have been recovered of it by him, in assumpsit, as money had and received to his use. He had the same rights defensively and affirmatively against the appellee, the assignee of the Lowry Hay & Grain Company, whether the bill of lading vested the title to the corn in appellee or not. Treating the appellee as owning only the draft, and holding the bill of lading as collateral security, appellant only connected himself with that draft by his contract of acceptance, made and payable in Natchez, and hence clearly within our anti-commercial statute. Appellant had a good cause of action against appellee. Wilkinson v. Searles, 70 Miss., 392; Millsaps v. Bank, 69 Miss., 918.

Judgment reversed and cause remanded.

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

Miller v. American National Bank, 76 Miss. 84 (Mich. 1898).

76 Miss. 84 (Miller v. American National Bank) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mobile Auto Co. v. Sturges
66 So. 205 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1914)
Mason v. A. E. Nelson Cotton Co.
62 S.E. 625 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1908)
Akers v. Jefferson County Savings Bank
48 S.E. 424 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1904)
Exchange National Bank v. Searles Bros.
81 Miss. 169 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1902)
Searles Bros. v. Smith Grain Co.
80 Miss. 688 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1902)