Davis v. Fortenberry
Mississippi Supreme Court
Davis v. Fortenberry, 114 Miss. 294 (Miss. 1917)
75 So. 119
Smith
Davis v. Fortenberry
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the court.
The court below committed no error in holding that appellee has a right of way by necessarily over appellant Davis’ land (Pleas v. Thomas, 75 Miss. 495, 22 So. 820), but should not have enjoined the prosecution of the criminal proceeding begun in the court of the justice of the peace before appellee’s bill was filed (Crighton v. Dahmer, 70 Miss. 602, 13 So. 237, 21 L. R. A. 84, 35 Am. St. Rep. 66). The decree rendered in the court below will be set aside, and a decree rendered here in accordance with this opinion. Costs to be paid by appellants L. G-. and H. B. Davis.
Affirmed in part and reversed in part.
Reference
- Cited By
- 5 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- 1. Easements. Implied easements. Way over surrounding land. Where a party owning a body of land lying along a public road, sold a part of the tract not touching the road, the purchaser had a right of way by necessity over the land of the vendor to the public road for the purpose of ingress and egress. 2. Injunction. Restraining criminal prosecutions. In such .case injunction will not lie at the instance of the purchaser of the land to restrain a criminal prosecution by the seller for an alleged trespass in going to and from the land, over the land of the seller to reach the public road.