character bar in Mississippi

2006Gen. v. Mississippi Institute of Aeronautics, 198 Miss. 288 , 22 So.2d 372 (Miss.1945), this Court confirmed that Section 27-73-1 did in fact apply to the overpayment of income tax: But it is contended by the appellant that Chapter 127, Laws 1944, granting the taxpayer the right to bring such a suit does not cover this particular character of claim, since it only provides that `if any person, firm or corporation as paid, or shall hereafter pay to the * * * state tax commission * * * through error or otherwise, whether paid under protest or not, any * * * eccise [sic] tax for which such person,

2006Gen. v. Mississippi Institute of Aeronautics, 198 Miss. 288 , 22 So.2d 372 (Miss.1945), this Court confirmed that Section 27-73-1 did in fact apply to the overpayment of income tax: But it is contended by the appellant that Chapter 127, Laws 1944, granting the taxpayer the right to bring such a suit does not cover this particular character of claim, since it only provides that `if any person, firm or corporation as paid, or shall hereafter pay to the * * * state tax commission * * * through error or otherwise, whether paid under protest or not, any * * * eccise [sic] tax for which such person,

2016While the State essentially argued that all of the Rule 404(b) exceptions applied, the Court noted that “where the State offers a relevant noncharacter purpose for admitting evidence, ‘the fact that other alternative purposes are argued is irrelevant . . . .’” Id. (quoting Cole v. State, 126 So. 3d 880, 885-86 (Miss. 2013)) (holding that, as long as the evidence of prior acts was not used to show propensity to commit a particular crime, it was admissible); see also Green v. State, 89 So. 3d 543 (Miss. 2012) (the fact that the evidence was offered for noncharacter purposes but bore some reflect

2016While the State essentially argued that all of the Rule 404(b) exceptions applied, the Court noted that “where the State offers a relevant non-character purpose for admitting evidence, ‘the fact that other alternative purposes are argued is irrelevant ....’” Id. (quoting Cole v. State, 126 So.3d 880, 885-86 (Miss. 2013)) (holding that, as long as the evidence of prior acts was not used to show propensity to commit a particular crime, it was admissible); see also Green v. State, 89 So.3d 543 (Miss. 2012) (the fact that the evidence was offered for nonehar-acter purposes but bore some reflection

2016While the State essentially argued that all of the Rule 404(b) exceptions applied, the Court noted that “where the State offers a relevant noncharacter purpose for admitting evidence, ‘the fact that other alternative purposes are argued is irrelevant . . . .’” Id. (quoting Cole v. State, 126 So. 3d 880, 885-86 (Miss. 2013)) (holding that, as long as the evidence of prior acts was not used to show propensity to commit a particular crime, it was admissible); see also Green v. State, 89 So. 3d 543 (Miss. 2012) (the fact that the evidence was offered for noncharacter purposes but bore some reflect

2016While the State essentially argued that all of the Rule 404(b) exceptions applied, the Court noted that “where the State offers a relevant non-character purpose for admitting evidence, ‘the fact that other alternative purposes are argued is irrelevant ....’” Id. (quoting Cole v. State, 126 So.3d 880, 885-86 (Miss. 2013)) (holding that, as long as the evidence of prior acts was not used to show propensity to commit a particular crime, it was admissible); see also Green v. State, 89 So.3d 543 (Miss. 2012) (the fact that the evidence was offered for nonehar-acter purposes but bore some reflection

2016Id. at 551 . ¶ 15.

1984Our court, in Bell v. Oates, 97 Miss. 790 , 53 South. 491 , in speaking of this character of claim, said: "Claims of the character of the one here involved, brought up for the first time after the death of the decedent, are looked upon by the courts with disfavor." In order to establish one, "the evidence must clearly establish a contract, express or implied, between the claimant and decedent, providing therefor." 113 Miss. at 734-35 , 74 So. at 612-13 .

1984Our court, in Bell v. Oates, 97 Miss. 790 , 53 South. 491 , in speaking of this character of claim, said: "Claims of the character of the one here involved, brought up for the first time after the death of the decedent, are looked upon by the courts with disfavor." In order to establish one, "the evidence must clearly establish a contract, express or implied, between the claimant and decedent, providing therefor." 113 Miss. at 734-35 , 74 So. at 612-13 .

1984Our court, in Bell v. Oates, 97 Miss. 790 , 53 South. 491 , in speaking of this character of claim, said: "Claims of the character of the one here involved, brought up for the first time after the death of the decedent, are looked upon by the courts with disfavor." In order to establish one, "the evidence must clearly establish a contract, express or implied, between the claimant and decedent, providing therefor." 113 Miss. at 734-35 , 74 So. at 612-13 .

1984Our court, in Bell v. Oates, 97 Miss. 790 , 53 South. 491 , in speaking of this character of claim, said: "Claims of the character of the one here involved, brought up for the first time after the death of the decedent, are looked upon by the courts with disfavor." In order to establish one, "the evidence must clearly establish a contract, express or implied, between the claimant and decedent, providing therefor." 113 Miss. at 734-35 , 74 So. at 612-13 .

1895The county treasurer is a public officer, and he cannot be compelled by mandamus to pay any claim, unless it is presented in the form required by law. ’ ’ To the same effect are People v. Elmira, 82 N. Y., 83 , last part of opinion, and authorities in note to Ray v. Wilson, 14 L.