Cases Argued and Decided in the Supreme Court of Mississippi Volume 3 (Paperback)

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1839 Excerpt: ... 932 HIGH COURT OF ERRORS AND APPEALS. L. White v. B. White, Administrator. ant in the lifetime of her husband, and was either a payment to him, or no payment at all. If the wife even retained the money, it was still his, and she could not have become indebted to him. The administrator cannot; therefore, claim to recover it as a debt due the husband, because no such debt could have existed. Can he claim it as a debt due himself in his representative capacity? He has made no contract either express or implied which would enable him to sustain the action for money had and received. He must declare for it either as money had and received to the use of the testator, or for money had and received to his own use. The testimony would not support a count for money had and received, to the use of the testator, and yet the money was received in the lifetime of the testator and for this reason it will not sustain this count for money had and received to the use of the administrator. If there be any remedy it is not in this form of action. The action is evidently misconceived. It is unnecessary to say whether this can be an appropriate form of action for an administrator, as it is evidently not so in this case. The demurrer should have been sustained. The judgment of the circuit court must therefore be reversed, the demurrer to evidence sustained, and judgment for the defendant. INDEX TO THE PRINCIPAL MATTERS. ACCOUNT. A decree to account should not be made, unless an indebtedness appears. Stamps et al. v. Bracy, 312. ACCORD AND SATISFACTION. To constitute accord and satisfaction a good bar, it must be executed and accepted as such. Barnes, Adm'r, v. Lloyd, 584. AGREEMENT. 1. Time is not always considered of the essence of a contract in a court of equity. Runnels v. Ja...