Still v. Anderson

Mississippi Supreme Court April 15, 1886

Still v. Anderson, 63 Miss. 545 (Miss. 1886)

Cooper

Opinion of the Court

Cooper, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The plea in bar of the appeal is sustained. The appellants were appellees in a former appeal, and maintained the correctness of the judgment now sought to be reversed. As it was then affirmed at their instance, they cannot now assail it. Caston v. Caston, 54 Miss. 512.

The distinction attempted to be drawn between this case and the one just cited is unsubstantial. The effort of the appellants is to have a construction put upon the verdict of the jury different from that given to it by'the lower court at the same term at which it was *549rendered, and which, if erroneous, was reviewable by this court when the former appeal was here. If there is error now the same error existed then, and the attention of the court should have been then called to it. We cannot try cases by installments.

The plea is sustained and appeal dismissed.

Reference

Full Case Name: Still & Still v. Robert Anderson
Cited By: 2 cases
Status: Published
Syllabus: AppeaXi. Affirmance on appeal of defendant. Subsequent appeal of plaintiff. Plea in bar. Supreme court practice. A plaintiff obtained judgment in a circuit court in an action of ejectment. The jury failed to assess the value of the rents. The plaintiff moved for a writ of inquiry, and his motion was overruled. The defendant afterward appealed to this court. The plaintiff took no cross-appeal. The court affirmed the judgment. The plaintiff then appealed from the judgment of the court overruling his motion for a writ of inquiry. The defendant (appellee here) plead in bar of this appeal the former appeal and judgment thereon. Held, that the appeal is not maintainable. The judgment of the court below having been affirmed at the instance of the present appellant, he cannot now assail it for an alleged error existing at the time the former appeal was taken.