Yazoo & Mississippi Valley Railroad v. Wilson

Citations

• 83 Miss. 224

Syllabus

<p>1. Cause oe Actiou. Nominal plaintiff. Use. Extent of recovery.</p> <p>Where a suit is begun by one person for the use of another a recovery can be had only on the cause of action, the legal title to which is in the plaintiff.</p> <p>2. Same. Assignment. Code 1892, $ 660. Substituted plaintiff.</p> <p>Where in such case the plaintiff, after suit begun, assigned! the cause of action to the usee, and under Code 1892, § 660, authorizing such a substitution, the usee is substituted for the plaintiff, the extent to which recovery may be had is not thereby enlarged.</p> <p>3. Same. Evidence. Independent contract.</p> <p>Where one party sues upon a contract for the use of another, and pending the suit the nominal plaintiff assigns the cause of action to the usee, evidence of an independent antecedent contract between defendant and1 the usee is not admissible.</p> <p>4. Cabbiebs. Transportation. Delay. Cause of action. Assignment. Right of assignee. Evidence. Antecedent contract.</p> <p>Where the bill of lading for the transportation of cotton expressly provided that the carrier should not be bound to transport the property by any particular train or vessel, or in time for any particular market, but only with such reasonable dispatch as its general business would permit, and there was no evidence of a breach of such agreement, evidence, in an action for delay based on such bill of lading, of an antecedent verbal contract between the carrier and an assignee to whom the cause of action Rad. been transferred after suit brought, alleged to have been made prior to the delivery of the cotton, to which agreement the original shippers were not parties, was inadmissible.</p>