Purnell v. Frank

Mississippi Supreme Court

Purnell v. Frank

68 Miss. 639

Mississippi Supreme Court·Decided April 15, 1891·Published

Opinion

CAMPBELL, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The record before us very poorly presents the case, but enough appears to show that the attachment for rent was sued out against a dead man, and when one appeared and claimed a portion of the [641]*641goods seized, the landlord sought to justify the taking and detention of the goods by virtue of this attachment, which was plainly void. The avowry is bad, and should have been so held.

Reversed and remanded.

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.

The record before us very poorly presents the case, but enough appears to show that the attachment for rent was sued out against a dead man, and when one appeared and claimed a portion of the [641]*641goods seized, the landlord sought to justify the taking and detention of the goods by virtue of this attachment, which was plainly void. The avowry is bad, and should have been so held.

Reversed and remanded.

Purnell v. Frank, 68 Miss. 639 (Mich. 1891).

Pincite

68 Miss. 639 (Purnell v. Frank) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.