Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

96 Miss. 544

Floyd v. Adler

Mississippi Supreme Court

Decided March 15, 1910

Mississippi Supreme Court · decided 1910-03-15

Feom tbe chancery court of Warren county. HoN. James Stowees HiCKs, Chancellor. Adler, appellee, was complainant in the court below;. Mrs. Floyd and her husband, appellants, were defendants there. From a decree overruling defendant’s demurrer to complainant’s bill of complaint defendants appealed to the supreme court. Appellant, Mrs. Floyd, contracted to build a house for appellee, Adler.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently January 1938

2 state decisions

Relies on Crighton v. Dahmer · Pleasants v. Smith

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1910-03-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Mayes, T.,

¶1delivered the opinion of the court.

¶2The allegations of the bill make a case for the equity court, .¡and it is our judgment that the demurrer was properly over*547ruled. Tbe object of tbe suit is to settle disputed questions ■of property right, having no aspect towards enjoining tbe commission of crime or restraining threatened criminal proceedings, as was the case in Creighton v. Dahmer, 70 Miss. 602, 13 South. 237, 21 L. R. A. 84, 35 Am. St. Rep. 666, and Pleasants v. Smith, 90 Miss. 440, 43 South. 475, 9 L. R. A. (N. S.) 773, 122 Am. St. Rep. 773. It is true that appellants may be guilty of a criminal trespass if some of the allegations of the bill are sustained; but this fact is not made the basis of any relief sought at the hands of the equity court, but is & mere incident. The real purpose of the bill is to obtain possession of the building in question, by compelling a surrender of the keys thereto, and additionally to prohibit appellants from interfering in any way with the completion and use of same by appellee.

¶3As the case now stands, the decree must be affirmed and the ■cause remanded. AffUmed.

/96/miss/544 · .json · Public domain