Jackson v. Port Gibson Bank
Mississippi Supreme Court
Jackson v. Port Gibson Bank, 85 Miss. 645 (Miss. 1904)
Whitfield
Jackson v. Port Gibson Bank
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the court.
The demurrer to the bill should have been sustained. There was no such deraignment of title as is required by Code 1892, § 501, which was expressly enacted for the purpose of changing the rule in Cook v. Friley, 61 Miss., 1. The case falls squarely within the rule of Long v. Stanley, 79 Miss., 298 (30 South. Rep., 823). The bill does not even set out the chain of title which the complainants allege they hold under the respondents.
The decree is reversed, and the cause remanded, with leave to amend the bill within sixty days from the -filing of the mandate in the court below.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Walter Jackson v. Port Gibson Bank
- Cited By
- 2 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- 1. Chancery Practice. Quieting title. Bill of complaint. Code 1892, l 501. A bill in equity to confirm title to real estate and to cancel and remove clouds therefrom is demurrable, if it fail to comply with Code 1892, § 501, providing that the complainant in such a bill must deraign his title, and that a mere statement that he is the real owner of the land shall be insufficient, unless good and valid reason be given for the failure. 2. Same. Concrete case. Such a bill charging that the defendant had executed, a 'deed of trust conveying the land as security for a debt, that default had been made in the payment of the debt, and that the deed of trust had been foreclosed and the lands purchased by complainant at the trustee’s sale, does not comply with said statute, since it makes no reference to the trustee’s deed and does not deraign the complainant’s title, and gives no reason for the failure.