Jenkins, Executrix v. Jenkins

2 Citing cases

  1. Coney v. Coney

    249 Miss. 561 (Miss. 1964)   Cited 7 times
    In Coney v. Coney, 249 Miss. 561, 163 So.2d 692 (1964), which was a suit to establish claims to realty, the lower court dismissed the action on the ground that the children of decedent were allowed to testify in defense of their deeds.

    " Jackson v. Johnson, 126 Miss. 26, 88 So. 410. See Saffold v. Horne, 72 Miss. 470, 18 So. 433; Baldridge v. Stribling, et ux, 101 Miss. 666, 57 So. 658; Jenkins v. Jenkins, 232 Miss. 879, 100 So.2d 789; 54 Am. Jur., Trusts, §§ 615, 616, p. 475; Tilford v. Torrey, 53 Ala. 120; Gainus v. Cannon, 42 Ark. 503; Norton v. McDevit, 122 N.C. 755; McCammon v. Pettitt, 35 Tenn. 242; Sandford v. Weeden, 49 Tenn. 71; Mixon v. Miles, 46 S.W. 105 (Tex. Civ. App.); 20 Am. Jur., Evidence, § 606, p. 519. We agree that this rule has been generally accepted, not only by this Court but by most of the courts in other states.

  2. Ascher v. Old Colony Ins. Co.

    240 Miss. 166 (Miss. 1961)   Cited 3 times

    Banks v. Banks, 118 Miss. 783, 79 So. 841; Buckley v. State, 130 Miss. 492, 94 So. 456; Chenault v. State, 154 Miss. 21, 122 So. 98; Jenkins v. Jenkins, 232 Miss. 879, 100 So.2d 789; Jones v. Jones, 222 Miss. 387, 76 So.2d 201; Lauderdale County v. Kittel, 229 Fed. 593; Prewitt v. State, 156 Miss. 731, 126 So. 824; 98 C.J.S., Secs. 134 et seq. pp. 148-9. VII. Vacancy Permit Forms No. 79 and No. 148 are totally irrelevant to any issue in this case and Form No. 148 did not automatically become part of the contract under the "liberalization" clause thereof.