Murphy v. Johnson
| Decision Date | 11 October 1901 |
| Citation | Murphy v. Johnson, 64 S.W. 894, 107 Tenn. 552 (Tenn. 1901) |
| Parties | MURPHY et al. v. JOHNSON et al. |
| Court | Tennessee Supreme Court |
Appeal from chancery court, Jefferson county; Jno. P. Smith, Chancellor.
Bill by J. D. Murphy, administrator of the estate of W. C. Newman, deceased, and others, against C. H. Johnson and others. From a decree of the court of chancery appeals affirming a decree for defendants, plaintiffs appeal. Reversed in part.
C. A. Frame, E. Holtsinger, and Pickle & Turner, for appellants. Park & Park, for appellees.
This bill denominates itself a "bill of review," for error apparent as to one item, and for newly-discovered evidence as to another item, of the decree challenged and enjoined. It alleges: That C. H. Johnson and his present codefendants, as next of kin of W. C. Newman, deceased, heretofore filed their bill in the chancery court of Jefferson county against J. D. Murphy, as administrator of said Newman, and his present cocomplainants as sureties on his administration bond, for an account and final settlement of Newman's estate. That the complainants in that bill, after stating certain preliminary facts, continued: That defendants to that bill, besides admitting those preliminary facts, in their answer said: but, title to the land having failed, J. D. Murphy, administrator, on advice of counsel, and to...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Johnson v. Johnson
...enforcement rather than modification of the decree. We find no reason to elevate form over substance in this case. See Murphy v. Johnson, 64 S.W. 894, 895 (Tenn. 1901) (review of pleading seeking equity depends on substance of the pleading, not name given it by Ms. Johnson petitions this Co......
-
Engler v. Knoblaugh
...15 N. J. Eq. 126; Loss v. Obry, 22 N. J. Eq. 52; Wardlaw v. Wardlaw, 50 Ga. 544; Gwinn v. Newton, 8 Humph. (Tenn.) 710; Murphy v. Johnson, 107 Tenn. 552, 64 S. W. 894; Palmer v. Bethard, 66 Ill. 529; Chapman v. Hurd, 67 Ill. 234; Henry v. Seagar, 80 Ill. App. 172; Barthell v. Roderick, 34 I......
-
State By and Through Canale ex rel. Hall v. Minimum Salary Dept. of African Methodist Episcopal Church, Inc.
...that pleas shall be given the effect required by their content, without regard to the name given them by the pleader. Murphy v. Johnson, 107 Tenn. 552, 64 S.W. 894 (1901); Arnold v. Moyers, 69 Tenn. 308 (1878); Dreher v. Hill, 5 Tenn. App. 10 (1927); Commerce Union Bank v. Haiman, 4 Tenn.Ap......
-
Wolfe v. Hammer
...review lies in the chancery court or in this court to review a decision of this court.' Another case directly in point is Murphy v. Johnson, 107 Tenn. 552, 64 S.W. 894. When a judgment or decree of the Court of Appeals or this Court is pronounced and entered of record, the aggrieved party i......