Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
  • G.H. McMorrough, of Lexington, for appellant. A judgment sustaining a demurrer, in the absence of an application to amend, is a final judgment so far as the interests of the demurrant are concerned. Dickerson v. Western Union Tel. Co., 111 Miss. 264. If the decree appealed from is final, and not interlocutory granting of leave to appeal is unnecessary. Y. M.V.R.R. Co. v. James, 108 Miss. 656. W.E. Morse, of Jackson, and S.E. Morse, of Gulfport, for appellant. The order of the chancellor allowed an amendment but in event an amendment was not made within sixty days the bill stood dismissed. The amendment was not made, so the bill was dismissed and for that reason the order of the chancellor became a final adjudication of the matters and facts set forth in the original bill and amended bill. The appeal bond shows on the reverse side thereof that it was filed on September 19, 1928. The appellee, by making motion in this court, entered his appearance the same as though process had issued for him. Boothe Pepper, of Lexington, for appellee. An appeal from a decree of a chancellor sustaining a demurrer to a bill, must be taken within thirty days after the rendition of such decree. If not taken in such time an appeal will be dismissed. Laws 1924, chap. 151, sec. 17; Armstrong et al. v. Moore, 112 Miss. 511, 73 So. 566; Clay County v. Chickasaw County, 63 Miss. 289; Barrier v. Kelly, 81 Miss. 166, 32 So. 999. Statutes limiting time for appeals are both mandatory and jurisdictional and must be strictly complied with. Turner v. Simmons, 99 Miss. 28; 54 So. 658; Nesbet v. Rodewald, 43 Miss. 304; Thomas v. Toomer, 50 Miss. 394; Johnson v. Jones, 51 Miss. 860; Gilleylen v. Martin, 73 Miss. 694, 10 So. 482; Day v. Tucker, 94 Miss. 222, 48 So. 742; State Fire Ins. Co. v. Morrison, 95 Miss. 639, 48 So. 178; Harvey v. Lumber Mineral Co., 96 Miss. 625, 51 So. 209; Parker v. Grenada County, 125 Miss. 617, 88 So. 172; Ward v. Whitfield, 94 Miss. 754; Greve v. McGee, 92 Miss. 190, 45 So. 706; Sowell v. Sowell, 101 Miss. 623, 57 So. 626; Griffith v. Bourn, 109 Miss. 360, 69 So. 177; Repsher v. Bostic Lbr. Mfg. Co., 133 Miss. 46, 73 So. 868; Ellis v. Sutton, 122 Miss. 691, 84 So. 909.
Judges
  • PER CURIAM.
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Click here to upload
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
  • G.H. McMorrough, of Lexington, for appellant. A judgment sustaining a demurrer, in the absence of an application to amend, is a final judgment so far as the interests of the demurrant are concerned. Dickerson v. Western Union Tel. Co., 111 Miss. 264. If the decree appealed from is final, and not interlocutory granting of leave to appeal is unnecessary. Y. M.V.R.R. Co. v. James, 108 Miss. 656. W.E. Morse, of Jackson, and S.E. Morse, of Gulfport, for appellant. The order of the chancellor allowed an amendment but in event an amendment was not made within sixty days the bill stood dismissed. The amendment was not made, so the bill was dismissed and for that reason the order of the chancellor became a final adjudication of the matters and facts set forth in the original bill and amended bill. The appeal bond shows on the reverse side thereof that it was filed on September 19, 1928. The appellee, by making motion in this court, entered his appearance the same as though process had issued for him. Boothe Pepper, of Lexington, for appellee. An appeal from a decree of a chancellor sustaining a demurrer to a bill, must be taken within thirty days after the rendition of such decree. If not taken in such time an appeal will be dismissed. Laws 1924, chap. 151, sec. 17; Armstrong et al. v. Moore, 112 Miss. 511, 73 So. 566; Clay County v. Chickasaw County, 63 Miss. 289; Barrier v. Kelly, 81 Miss. 166, 32 So. 999. Statutes limiting time for appeals are both mandatory and jurisdictional and must be strictly complied with. Turner v. Simmons, 99 Miss. 28; 54 So. 658; Nesbet v. Rodewald, 43 Miss. 304; Thomas v. Toomer, 50 Miss. 394; Johnson v. Jones, 51 Miss. 860; Gilleylen v. Martin, 73 Miss. 694, 10 So. 482; Day v. Tucker, 94 Miss. 222, 48 So. 742; State Fire Ins. Co. v. Morrison, 95 Miss. 639, 48 So. 178; Harvey v. Lumber Mineral Co., 96 Miss. 625, 51 So. 209; Parker v. Grenada County, 125 Miss. 617, 88 So. 172; Ward v. Whitfield, 94 Miss. 754; Greve v. McGee, 92 Miss. 190, 45 So. 706; Sowell v. Sowell, 101 Miss. 623, 57 So. 626; Griffith v. Bourn, 109 Miss. 360, 69 So. 177; Repsher v. Bostic Lbr. Mfg. Co., 133 Miss. 46, 73 So. 868; Ellis v. Sutton, 122 Miss. 691, 84 So. 909.
Judges
  • PER CURIAM.
See more information ...
Smart Summary

BUCKINGHAM v. JONES.

APPEAL AND ERROR. Decree dismissing bill unless amended within sixty days, was final, appealable decree.

Decree of dismissal in case bill was not amended within sixty days from date of decree constituted a final, appealable decree after expiration of such period.

PER CURIAM.

The decree appealed from is a final decree ( McCullum v. M.C. Johnnie Dillard [Miss.], 119 So. 180; Moore v. Evans, 98 Miss. 855, 54 So. 438), and the motion to dismiss must be overruled.

Overruled.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.
Try AI Pro free for 7 days Upgrade to AI Pro

Comments

BUCKINGHAM v. JONES
(May 20, 1929)