Wynne v. Illinois Central Railroad Company

• Decision Date: 23 November 1914
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court
• Parties: L. B. WYNNE et al. v. ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY

66 So. 411

105 Miss. 784

L. B. WYNNE et al. v. ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY

Supreme Court of Mississippi

November 23, 1914

October 1914

Petition by Illinois Central Railroad Company to the judges of the supreme court, at chambers, for the issuance of a writ of prohibition.

The facts are fully stated in the opinion of the court.

Petition denied.

Mayes &amp Mayes, attorneys for petitioners.

McNeil & Loeb, contra.

OPINION

SMITH, C. J.

This is a petition presented by counsel for the Illinois Central Railroad Company to the judges of this court, at chambers, for the issuance of a writ of prohibition.

It appears from the petition that there is pending in the circuit court of Copiah county a cause wherein the Illinois Central Railroad Company is defendant, and L. B. Wynne, et als., are plaintiffs; that on motion of plaintiffs an order has been entered by that court, under section 1003 of the Code, requiring the defendant to have certain of its books papers, documents, etc., at Hazlehurst, Mississippi, on November 26, 1914, at ten o'clock a. m., for the inspection of the plaintiffs, and to allow them a reasonable time within which to make this inspection, and such copies thereof as they may desire. The petition then alleged that this order was void, for the reason that the circuit judge exceeded his authority in making it, setting forth particularly wherein this authority had been exceeded, and then proceeded, "Your petitioners further show to the court that there is no other adequate remedy which can be appealed to in this cause. The court has held that in an order of this sort there can be no appeal from the order itself. The penalties prescribed by the statute above referred to are so severe that your petitioner dare not disobey the order, even though it believes it to be void, because the risk, in view of the penalty imposed by the statute, is too great. This suit is for many thousand dollars, and if your petitioners should be in error in their view of the law, and refuse obedience to the order on the ground that it was void, the court below would enter judgment for the full amount sued for by the plaintiffs. Your petitioners show there is no appeal, no other writ known to the law, which would be effective to prevent the hardships imposed by this order, except this court grant a writ of prohibition. Wherefore, petitioners respectfully pray that this be done, and that the trial judge...