Brooks v. Barkley
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi |
| Writing for the Court | WHITFIELD, J. |
| Citation | 18 So. 419,72 Miss. 320 |
| Parties | S. A. BROOKS v. SALLIE A. BARKLEY |
| Decision Date | 24 December 1894 |
18 So. 419
72 Miss. 320
S. A. BROOKS
v.
SALLIE A. BARKLEY
Supreme Court of Mississippi
December 24, 1894
October, 1894
FROM the circuit court of Noxubee county, HON. NEWNAN CAYCE, Judge.
Action by appellant against appellee on an open account. The declaration alleges that the defendant, Sallie A. Barkley, in the year 1888, being the owner of a plantation in Lowndes county, Mississippi, permitted her husband, A. H. Barkley, to carry on planting operations on said plantation as her agent; that during said year, in conducting said business, he bought plantation supplies from one Nance, and, in January, 1889, as her agent, borrowed money from plaintiff to pay Nance for such supplies, executing to plaintiff his individual note for the money so borrowed; that the money was used to pay Nance, and that the debt was one for which she, as principal, was alone liable; that in accepting the note of said A. H. Barkley it was not intended to release the said S. A. Barkley from liability. The declaration further avers that during the year 1890 the said Sallie A. Barkley permitted her husband, as her agent, to conduct the planting business on said plantation, and that in so doing he purchased of one Scales certain plantation supplies for the benefit of the wife; that afterwards she obtained from plaintiff a loan of money with which the said indebtedness of Scales was paid. Plaintiff asked judgment for the amount of both bills, averring that defendant was liable therefor. A demurrer to the declaration was sustained, and, plaintiff declining to amend, the suit was dismissed, and plaintiff appeals.
Judgment reversed and cause remanded.
Orr & Orr, for appellant.
The declaration is good as a common law declaration against a principal for the acts of an agent. Where the agent has executed his individual promise, the creditor may sue him or the principal.
The declaration is also good under § 2293, code 1892. That the husband executed his note for the debt to Nance is immaterial. 43 Miss. 539; Clopton v. Matheny, 48 Ib., 285. Neither the mere acceptance of the note of the husband nor the recovery of a judgment against him will release the wife. Cook v. Ligon, 54 Miss. 368.
The case of Porter v. Staten, 64 Miss. 421, is not applicable to the facts stated in this declaration, but the case falls within the rule laid down in Ross v. Baldwin, 65 Miss. 570.
W. W. Humphries, for appellee.
We think the demurrer was properly sustained, and rely...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Chase Nat. Bank v. Chapman, 31604
...since the emanicipation of women. Porter v. Staten, 64 Miss. 421, 424; Ross v. Baldwin, 65 Miss. 570, 5 So. 110; Brooks v. Barkley, 72 Miss. 320, 18 So. 419; McCormick v. Altneave & Co., 73 Miss. 86, 19 So. 198; Gross v. Pigg, 73 Miss. 286, 19 So. 235; Johnson v. Jones, 82 Miss. 483, 34 So.......
-
American Blakeslee Mfg. Co. v. Martin & Son, 22457
...under the law, that it is wholly insufficient to support a plea of novation as was held in the case of Brooks v. Barkley, 27 Miss. 320, 18 So. 419, and of Clopton v. Matheny, 46 Miss. 285, where the court held that: "Where a necessary article is purchased by a husband for the wife's plantat......
-
American Blakeslee Mfg. Co. v. Martin & Son, 22457
...under the law, that it is wholly insufficient to support a plea of novation as was held in the case of Brooks v. Barkley, 27 Miss. 320, 18 So. 419, and of Clopton v. Matheny, 46 Miss. 285, where the court held that: "Where a necessary article is purchased by a husband for the wife's plantat......
-
Holden v. Rice Mercantile Co., 14046
...liable according to the statute. Johnson v. Jones, 82 Miss. 483, 34 So. 83; Ross v. Baldwin, 65 Miss. 570, 5 So. 111; Brooks v. Barkley, 72 Miss. 320, 18 So. 419; Croes v. Pigg, 73 Miss. 286, 19 So. 235; Porter v. Staten, 64 Miss. 421, 1 So. 487. Argued orally by Clem. V. Ratcliff, for appe......
-
Chase Nat. Bank v. Chapman, 31604
...since the emanicipation of women. Porter v. Staten, 64 Miss. 421, 424; Ross v. Baldwin, 65 Miss. 570, 5 So. 110; Brooks v. Barkley, 72 Miss. 320, 18 So. 419; McCormick v. Altneave & Co., 73 Miss. 86, 19 So. 198; Gross v. Pigg, 73 Miss. 286, 19 So. 235; Johnson v. Jones, 82 Miss. 483, 34 So.......
-
American Blakeslee Mfg. Co. v. Martin & Son, 22457
...under the law, that it is wholly insufficient to support a plea of novation as was held in the case of Brooks v. Barkley, 27 Miss. 320, 18 So. 419, and of Clopton v. Matheny, 46 Miss. 285, where the court held that: "Where a necessary article is purchased by a husband for the wife's plantat......
-
American Blakeslee Mfg. Co. v. Martin & Son, 22457
...under the law, that it is wholly insufficient to support a plea of novation as was held in the case of Brooks v. Barkley, 27 Miss. 320, 18 So. 419, and of Clopton v. Matheny, 46 Miss. 285, where the court held that: "Where a necessary article is purchased by a husband for the wife's plantat......
-
Holden v. Rice Mercantile Co., 14046
...liable according to the statute. Johnson v. Jones, 82 Miss. 483, 34 So. 83; Ross v. Baldwin, 65 Miss. 570, 5 So. 111; Brooks v. Barkley, 72 Miss. 320, 18 So. 419; Croes v. Pigg, 73 Miss. 286, 19 So. 235; Porter v. Staten, 64 Miss. 421, 1 So. 487. Argued orally by Clem. V. Ratcliff, for appe......