Brunson v. Morgan

76 Ala. 593
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedDecember 15, 1884
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 76 Ala. 593 (Brunson v. Morgan) 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
Brunson v. Morgan, 76 Ala. 593 (Ala. 1884).

Opinion

STONE, O. J.

— The deed to Stoudenmeier & Co. vested the legal title in the several members of the firm as tenants in common, and not in the name of the partnei'ship as such. Its legal effect was the same as if the deed had been made to the three partners in their individual names. Each partner became seized of an undivided third part of the land, subject, so far as the powers of a court of law can be exerted, to all the incidents of real estate held in common. — Code of 1876, § 2191. In equity, a different rule prevails. If lands are purchased with partnership effects, and are needed for the payment of partnership debts, or to equalize the interests of the several partners, equity will convert them into personalty, with all the incidents of personal property. — Espy v. Comer, ante, p. 501, and authorities cited; Caldwell v. Parmer, 56 Ala. 405 ; Lang v. Waring, 25 Ala. 625 ; Parsons on Part. 571-2.

According to the undisputed facts in this case, the firm of [595]*595Stondenmoier & Co. consisted of three partners. Stoudenmeier alone executed the deed, employing the firm name, and he alone acknowledged its execution. The names of the other partners no where appear in the conveyance. This conveyed the legal title to only Stoudenmeier’s undivided third interest in the lands, and left the remaining two-thirds in the other two partners, to be devested by a suit in equity, if a proper case can be made. The fact that the other partners afterwards assented to the sale, by oral agreement, did not devest the legal title out of them. The authority to convey lands for another, even if the deed purported to convey the title of the other partners by name, must be in writing. — Code of 1876, § 2121. The Circuit Court, erred in holding that the deed, executed as above set forth, conveyed the title of each member of the firm.

Reversed and remanded.

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

Related

Sealy v. Lake
10 So. 2d 364 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1942)
Kentucky Block Cannel Coal Co. v. Sewell
249 F. 840 (Sixth Circuit, 1918)
Hendren v. Wing
31 S.W. 149 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1895)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
76 Ala. 593, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brunson-v-morgan-ala-1884.