Cleveland State Bank v. Cotton Exchange Bank
| Decision Date | 11 November 1918 |
| Docket Number | 20453 |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
| Parties | CLEVELAND STATE BANK v. COTTON EXCHANGE BANK |
APPEAL from the circuit court of Bolivar county, HON. W. A. ALCORN, JR., Judge.
Petition for mandamus by the Cotton Exchange Bank against the Cleveland State Bank. From a judgment for plaintiff, the defendant appealed without bond. Motion to dismiss appeal overruled.
The facts are fully stated in the opinion of the court.
Motion to dismiss the appeal overruled.
A. W. Shands, for appellant.
Owen & Roberts, for appellee.
Appellee moves to dismiss the appeal in this case because no bond was filed by appellant. The Cleveland State Bank was a county depository, and as such had certain funds in its charge. The superintendent of education issued certain warrants on account of school funds which were in the said depository, and the revenue agent filed a suit enjoining the Cleveland State Bank from paying said warrants on the ground that they were issued without authority of law. No one was made a party defendant to the suit except the Cleveland State Bank.
The Cotton Exchange Bank acquired certain of these warrants and brought a mandamus in the circuit court to compel payment of the warrant. There was judgment in the mandamus suit against the Cleveland State Bank, and the bank appealed here, but failed to file an appeal bond, on the theory that it, being a depository, was entitled to appeal without bond, under section 94, Code of 1906 (section 76, Hemingway's Code). Motion to dismiss the appeal was presented, on the theory that the depository or bank was not entitled to appeal without bond.
We are of the opinion that the bank was not entitled to appeal without bond, but that under section 4913, Code of 1906 (section 3189, Hemingway's Code), the court has power to permit the appellant to supply the necessary bond, which he may do within ten days, and unless said bond is filed within ten days, conditioned according to law, the suit will stand dismissed. See Hudson v. Gray, 58 Miss. 589.
Overruled, with leave to file bond in ten days.
Overruled.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Love v. Miss. Cottonseed Products Co.
... ... charge of liquidation of bank, for collection of debt ... allegedly due the ... authorizing "officials representing state" and any ... "state officer" in suit in which ... v. Coahoma County, 64 Miss. 358; Cleveland State Bank v ... Cotton Exchange Bank, 118 ... ...
-
Love v. Mississippi Cottonseed Products Co.
... ... of the Sunflower Bank, against the Mississippi Cottonseed ... Products ... submitted that the appellant, even if a state officer, is not ... an official representing the ... v. Coahoma County, 64 Miss. 358; Cleveland State Bank v ... Cotton Exchange Bank, 118 ... ...
-
Cleveland State Bank v. Cotton Exchange Bank
...by the Cotton Exchange Bank against the Cleveland State Bank. From a judgment ordering a peremptory writ, respondent appeals. See, also, 79 So. 810. facts are fully stated in the opinion of the court. Judgment reversed and cause remanded. A. W. Shands, for appellant. It appears from the ple......
-
Lovett v. Harrison
... ... Hudson v. Gray, 58 Miss. 589; State v. Coahoma ... County, 64 Miss. 358, 1 So. 501; Cleveland State ... Bank v. Cotton Exchange, 118 Miss ... ...