Case Name: SMITH et al. v. COPIAH COUNTY et al.; COPIAH COUNTY et al. v. SMITH et al.
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1917-02-05
Citations: 239 F. 432
Docket Number: No. 2953
Parties: SMITH et al. v. COPIAH COUNTY et al. COPIAH COUNTY et al. v. SMITH et al.
Judges: Before PARDEE and WALKER, Circuit Judges, and GRUBB, District Judge.
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 239
Pages: 432–432

Head Matter:
SMITH et al. v. COPIAH COUNTY et al. COPIAH COUNTY et al. v. SMITH et al.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
February 5, 1917.)
No. 2953.
Appeal and Cross-Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of Mississippi: Henry C. Niles, Judge.
Bill by Charles D. Smith, W. L. Smith, and R. L. Leonard against Copiah County and others, who cross-complained. From the decree, plaintiffs appeal, and defendants cross-appeal.
Affirmed.
For opinion below, see 239 Fed. 425.
Caruthers Ewing, of Memphis, Tenn., for appellants and cross-appellees.
J. S. Sexton and H. J. Wilson, both of Hazlehurst, Miss., for appellees and cross-appellants.
Before PARDEE and WALKER, Circuit Judges, and GRUBB, District Judge.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
From our examination and consideration of the record in this case we do not find that the appellant, complainant in the court below, shows any case for the reformation, rescinding, or cancellation of the contract in suit. The reasons given by the District Judge, in which we'mainly concur, fully support the decree rendered. On the cross-appeal we concur with the District Judge in disallowing the liquidated damages claimed.
The decree appealed from is affirmed, and, as both parties appealed, using the same transcript, the costs in this court are equally divided.