Walsh Const. Co. v. Davis

Decision Date13 December 1948
Docket Number36844.
Citation37 So.2d 757,204 Miss. 509
CourtMississippi Supreme Court
PartiesWALSH CONST. CO. et al. v. DAVIS et al.

Joe E. Brown, of Natchez, and Swep S. Taylor, Jr. of Jackson, for appellants.

Dixon L. Pyles, D. E. Breland and B. B. McClendon all of Jackson, for appellees.

SMITH Justice.

Suit was filed in this case by the appellees against appellants on March 17, 1946, in the Circuit Court of the First Judicial District of Hinds County. It was transferred to the chancery court, where final decree was entered on October 17, 1947, in favor of appellees, including an allowance for attorneys fees and clerical and accounting services. From that decree, and cause is appealed here.

Cross-appeal was taken by the attorney for appellees as to the amount allowed for attorney's fees, he having filed in the case a proper assignment by appellees covering his fees, and having the right, therefore, to cross-appeal.

Since the proof, in our judgment, is overwhelming that both defendants were doing business in this State, as contemplated by our statutes and decisions, we do not deem it necessary to discuss that issue, or review the facts embraced in the four large volumes comprising the transcript of the record in the case. We have very carefully considered the entire record, and all the arguments, however.

We therefore, pass to the question of whether the Federal Public Housing Corporation was suable, and in the Mississippi Courts. The suit was brought under the Contract Settlement Act of 1944, 41 U.S.C.A. § 101 et seq., and it is admitted that the contract, on which this suit was based, was subject to the terms of that Act. Under its Section 113, it is expressly provided that if the contracting agency is a corporation 'controlled by the United States the suit shall be brought against such corporation in any court of competent jurisdiction in accordance with existing law.' In December 1945, the Government Corporation Control Act, 31 U.S.C.A.§ 841 et seq., was passed. By Sec. 846 thereof, it was enacted that the corporations included in the term "wholly owned Government corporation' means the * * * Federal Public Housing Authority * * *' and others therein mentioned. See National Housing Agency v. Orton, Tex.Civ.App., 202 S.W.2d 243. We, therefore, conclude that the Federal Public Housing Authority was suable, and that the circuit and chancery courts of the State of Mississippi, in both of which this case appeared, were courts of 'competent jurisdiction' to adjudicate the litigation.

This case involved a long series of preliminary preparatory steps,--study, numerous trips to Washington and Atlanta seeking desired interviews with appellants, hard work, study and skill. The litigation was in two courts, involved proceedings before a master in the chancery court, including contested exceptions to his report, the litigation itself extending over a period of approximately eighteen months of activity. A large amount of money was involved; the collection and collation of a great amount of evidence was necessary; filling out of numerous complicated Federal forms had to be correctly done; a large number of witnesses and a mass of documentary proof had to be produced...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Burrell v. Mississippi State Tax Com'n
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • August 10, 1988
    ...366 (Miss.1983); Lewis v. Delta Loans, Inc., 300 So.2d 142, 144-45 (Miss.1974); (g) Contract Settlement Act: Walsh Construction Co. v. Davis, 204 Miss. 509, 37 So.2d 757 (1948). The Supreme Court has recently reaffirmed the proposition that state courts have concurrent jurisdiction with the......
  • Marx v. Truck Renting and Leasing Ass'n Inc.
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • September 30, 1987
    ...366 (Miss.1983); Lewis v. Delta Loans, Inc., 300 So.2d 142, 144-45 (Miss.1974); (g) Contract Settlement Act: Walsh Construction Co. v. Davis, 204 Miss. 509, 37 So.2d 757 (1948). C. The majority correctly acknowledges that state courts have concurrent jurisdiction with the federal courts ove......
  • Monolith Portland Mid. Co. v. Reconstruction F. Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of California
    • January 20, 1955
    ...at page 731, since arbitration was not required as a condition precedent to settlement. To the contrary is Walsh Construction Co. v. Davis, 1948, 204 Miss. 509, 37 So. 2d 757. It does not appear from the decision whether the regulations referred to above were cited to the A survey of the en......
  • Morroco v. State
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • December 13, 1948

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT