Wilczinski v. Smith

Mississippi Supreme Court

Wilczinski v. Smith

70 So. 347, 110 Miss. 251

Mississippi Supreme Court·Decided October 15, 1915·Published

Opinion

Cook, J.,

delivered the opinion, of the court.

Appellee, as a junior mortgagee, was entitled to have the payments made by J. E. King applied to the principal of the indebtedness. McAlister v. Jerman, 32 Miss. 142; Chaffe v. Wilson, 59 Miss. 42; Boyd v. Warmack, 62 Miss. 536.

By eliminating the usurious interest and by crediting J. E. King with the market value of the property delivered to appellant, we are unable to say that the chancery court erred in entering a decree in favor of C. R. Smith. There was a conflict of evidence as to the amount of credit King was entitled to, but this conflict was solved against appellant. •

Affirmed.

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

Cook, J.,

delivered the opinion, of the court.

Appellee, as a junior mortgagee, was entitled to have the payments made by J. E. King applied to the principal of the indebtedness. McAlister v. Jerman, 32 Miss. 142; Chaffe v. Wilson, 59 Miss. 42; Boyd v. Warmack, 62 Miss. 536.

By eliminating the usurious interest and by crediting J. E. King with the market value of the property delivered to appellant, we are unable to say that the chancery court erred in entering a decree in favor of C. R. Smith. There was a conflict of evidence as to the amount of credit King was entitled to, but this conflict was solved against appellant. •

Affirmed.

Wilczinski v. Smith, 70 So. 347, 110 Miss. 251 (Mich. 1915).

Pincite

70 So. 347 (Wilczinski v. Smith) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related