Scully v. Lowenstein

Citations

• 56 Miss. 652

Syllabus

<p>1. Contract. Reformation thereof. Res adjudicata. Jurisdiction.</p> <p>S. sued L. & B. in assumpsit, upon a special contract. The defendants pleaded a denial of the contract declared upon, and averred a different contract in ■writing, of which they made proferí. Upon this issue the verdict and judgment were for the defendants. S. then filed a bill to reform the written contract, and to obtain a decree against L. & B. for a breach of the contract as reformed. The bill alleged that, by a mistake in drafting the contract, it failed to express the true intention of the parties. The defendants pleaded to the bill the judgment at law as res adjudicata. Held, that the plea is bad; for, even if the question whether the contract expresses the intention of the parties had been in issue in the court of law, that court would have been incompetent to consider or adjudge it.</p> <p>2. Eds Adjudicata. Extent of the •principle.</p> <p>Where the defence of res adjudicata is made,' the judgment pleaded can only be construed to include such questions as were, or might have been, litigated in the former suit.</p>