Leake County MsArchives Court.....Rogers, Mr 1839
************************************************
Copyright.  All rights reserved.
http://usgwarchives.net/copyright.htm
http://usgwarchives.net/ms/msfiles.htm
************************************************

File contributed for use in USGenWeb Archives by:
Deb Haines ddhaines@gmail.com December 8, 2005, 9:11 am

Source: Reports Of Cases Argued And Determined In The High Court Of Errors And Appeals Of The State Of Mississippi
Written: 1839

Rogers et al. v. M'Daniel.

pages 172-173

The record must show a judgment in order to give jurisdiction to the appellate 
court.

Thu written evidence relied on in the court below, should be set out in the 
bill of exceptions, if to be reviewed by the appellate court.

IN error from Leak county.

This was an action of assumpsit, founded on the promissory note of the 
plaintiff in error.

The defendants below pleaded the general issue. It was proved by a certain 
title bond, that said note was given in part payment of a tract of land. The 
certificate of the register of the land office was offered in evidence to show 
that said land had been entered by one Pearl, previous to the purchase of the 
defendants below. It was also proved that notice was served on the plaintiff 
in the action to produce his titles, &c. All of which evidence was excluded 
from the jury by the court below, and a bill of exceptions tendered and 
signed, but neither said bond for title, nor the certificate of the register 
was embodied in the bill of exceptions.

Huntington, for plaintiff in error.

Per Curiam, SHARKEY, C. J.—We are compelled to dismiss this case because the 
record does not show a judgment, or that any judgment was rendered on the 
verdict of the jury. But if this defect could be obviated, there is still 
nothing in the record which could avail the plaintiff in error. The action was 
on a note, and a plea of non assumpsit. The bill of exceptions shows, that the 
defendants relied on a failure of consideration. In support of their defence, 
they introduced a bond to make title, in order to prove that the note was 
given for land. They also offered the certificate of the register to prove, 
that the land was entered by another person, but neither the bond, nor the 
certificate are set out in the bill of exceptions, and both were material to 
enable the court to judge of the nature of the contract. The bill of 
exceptions is also defective in not showing when the exceptions were taken.

Let the cause be dismissed.


Source: Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the High Court of Errors and 
Appeals of the State of Mississippi, by Volney E. Howard, Reporter to the 
State; Vol. III; Containing the Cases for December Term, 1838, and January 
Term, 1839. NEW ORLEANS: E. JOHNS & CO., STATIONERS’ HALL, 1839.

File at: http://files.usgwarchives.net/ms/leake/court/rogers44wl.txt

This file has been created by a form at http://www.poppet.org/msfiles/

File size: 3.0 Kb