Bank of Henry v. Elkins

51 So. 821, 165 Ala. 628, 1910 Ala. LEXIS 124
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedFebruary 10, 1910
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 51 So. 821 (Bank of Henry v. Elkins) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bank of Henry v. Elkins, 51 So. 821, 165 Ala. 628, 1910 Ala. LEXIS 124 (Ala. 1910).

Opinion

McCLELLAN, J.

— Independent of our statute for the quieting of titles and the determination of claims to real estate (Code, § 5443 et seq.), courts of equity have jurisdiction to cancel and remove a specially described cloud upon the complainant’s title, when the owner is in possession, and when' the evidence of the alleged cloud is not void on its face, and extrinsic evidence is necessary to show its invalidity. — 4 Pomeroy, Eq. § 1399, and notes thereto; Jones v. De Graffenreid, 60 Ala. 145; Daniel v. Stewart, 55 Ala. 278; Plant v. Barclay, 56 Ala. 561.

The bill in the cause at bar invokes the stated jurisdiction of equity. It is not a bill seeking the benefit of the statutory system provided for in the before-cited statutes. In the third paragraph of the bill it is averred that- complainant was, when the bill was filed, the owner and in possession of the lands sought to be relieved of the described cloud. The lands are definitely designated by reference, in that paragraph, to Exhibit A to the bill, viz., a deed to complainant of a specified date. Had the bill been an effort to avail of the statutory sys[630]*630tem mentioned, then, of course, observation of the statutory requirement would have been essential, such as averments of peaceable possession, and that there was no suit pending to enforce or test the validity of the title, claim, etc.

The demurrer was properly overruled. The decree is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Anderson, Mayfield, and Sayre, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Taylor v. Gray
90 So. 2d 778 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1956)
Casey v. Krump
82 So. 2d 424 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1955)
Floyd v. Andress
20 So. 2d 331 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1944)
Jarrett v. Hagedorn
185 So. 401 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1938)
Teal v. Mixon
169 So. 477 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1936)
First Nat. Bank of Opp v. Boles
165 So. 586 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1936)
Wood v. Estes
139 So. 331 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1932)
May v. Granger
139 So. 569 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1932)
Jones v. Lacey
125 So. 635 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1930)
Joiner v. Glover
78 So. 55 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1918)
King Lumber Co. v. Spragner
58 So. 920 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1912)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
51 So. 821, 165 Ala. 628, 1910 Ala. LEXIS 124, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bank-of-henry-v-elkins-ala-1910.