Johnson v. Murphy
Decision Date | 11 October 1901 |
Citation | 64 S.W. 895 |
Parties | JOHNSON et al. v. MURPHY et al. |
Court | Tennessee Supreme Court |
Bill by C. H. Johnson and others against J. D. Murphy, administrator of the estate of W. C. Newman, deceased, and others. From a decree in favor of plaintiffs entered in accordance with the procedendo of the supreme court, defendants bring error. Dismissed.
Park & Park, for plaintiffs in error. C. A. Frame, E. Holtsinger, and Pickle & Turner, for defendants in error.
C. H. Johnson and others, next of kin of W. C. Newman, deceased, filed this bill against J. D. Murphy, administrator, and the sureties on his bond, for a settlement of the estate. On appeal the supreme court rendered a decree in favor of the complainants for $5,285.09, and remanded the cause for collection thereof and distribution among those entitled. Thereupon decree was entered in the lower court in accordance with the procedendo, and the defendants sued out this writ of error. A writ of error will not lie in such a case; otherwise, the litigation might become endless. If it will lie after one remand, it will lie after another and another, and so on without limit, and the execution of the decree of this court through a procedendo to the lower court may by that means be made practically impossible.
Dismiss the writ.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Adams v. Bd. of Com'rs of Whitley Cnty.
...v. Frost, 1 Md. 377;Miller v. Bernecker, 46 Mo. 194;Harburg v. Arnold, 87 Mo. App. 326;McCabe v. Emerson, 18 Pa. 111;Johnson v. Murphy, 107 Tenn. 558, 64 S. W. 895;Platte, etc., Co. v. Hubbard (Colo. Sup.) 69 Pac. 514; Davis v. Alexander, 1 G. Green, 86; Trulock v. Friendship Lodge, 75 Iowa......
- Johnson v. Murphy