Yates v. Box

Mississippi Supreme Court

Yates v. Box

11 So. 2d 802, 194 Miss. 374, 1943 Miss. LEXIS 35

CourtMississippi Supreme Court

DecidedFebruary 1, 1943

DocketNo. 35178.

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 11 So. 2d 802 (Yates v. Box) 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

Yates v. Box, 11 So. 2d 802, 194 Miss. 374, 1943 Miss. LEXIS 35 (Mich. 1943).

Pincite

Opinion

Griffith, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

Were we to take jurisdiction of this appeal and hold that the demurrers were properly sustained, the bill on remand would be capable of amendment in material particulars, and when so amended’might be good as against any further demurrer. We, therefore, repeat what was said in Carothers v. Bank, 158 Miss. 602, 131 So. 111, and reaffirmed in Stirling v. Whitney Bank, 170 Miss. 674, 150 So. 654, 655, that: “Appeals from amendable bills demurred to and the demurrer sustained or overruled do not settle all of the controlling principles of a case, .and *375 these cannot he known or determined. sufficiently until the pleadings have been settled. If we entertained appeals to amendable hills from interlocutory decrees sustaining or overruling demurrers, it would result in delay and expense rather than save it.”

Appeal dismissed.

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

Griffith, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

Were we to take jurisdiction of this appeal and hold that the demurrers were properly sustained, the bill on remand would be capable of amendment in material particulars, and when so amended’might be good as against any further demurrer. We, therefore, repeat what was said in Carothers v. Bank, 158 Miss. 602, 131 So. 111, and reaffirmed in Stirling v. Whitney Bank, 170 Miss. 674, 150 So. 654, 655, that: “Appeals from amendable bills demurred to and the demurrer sustained or overruled do not settle all of the controlling principles of a case, .and *375 these cannot he known or determined. sufficiently until the pleadings have been settled. If we entertained appeals to amendable hills from interlocutory decrees sustaining or overruling demurrers, it would result in delay and expense rather than save it.”

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 So. 2d 802, 194 Miss. 374, 1943 Miss. LEXIS 35, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/yates-v-box-miss-1943.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack