Home/Supreme Court of Alabama/East Birmingham Realty Co. v. Birmingham Machine & Foundry Co.

East Birmingham Realty Co. v. Birmingham Machine & Foundry Co.

49 So. 448, 160 Ala. 461, 1909 Ala. LEXIS 73
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedApril 22, 1909
StatusPublished
Cited by31 cases

This text of 49 So. 448 (East Birmingham Realty Co. v. Birmingham Machine & Foundry Co.) 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
East Birmingham Realty Co. v. Birmingham Machine & Foundry Co., 49 So. 448, 160 Ala. 461, 1909 Ala. LEXIS 73 (Ala. 1909).

Opinion

McCLELLAN, J.

The East Birmingham Realty Company filed this bill to quiet title to real estate, under Code 1896, § 809 et seq., against the Birmingham Machine & Foundry Company, et al. The land in question is described in the bill as being a strip 50 feet wide and 2,700 feet in length, having its termini, on the west, at the right of way line of the South & North Alabama Railroad Company (Louisville & Nashville Railroad), and, on the east, at the right of way line of the Georgia Pacific Railway Company, now owned by the Southern Railway Company. An indispensable aid to- an understanding of the status involved on this appeal, as well as in explanation of the reasons on which our conclusions are based, inducing decision, is the map attached, as Exhibit A, to the bill. A fac similie of the map will therefore be here incorporated in the opinion:

[465]*465

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

Related

Clarke v. Tannin, Inc.
301 F. Supp. 3d 1150 (U.S. Circuit Court, 2018)
Clarke v. Tannin, Inc.
S.D. Alabama, 2018
Jackson v. Moody
431 So. 2d 509 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1983)
Booth v. Montrose Cemetery Ass'n
387 So. 2d 774 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1980)
Daniel v. Evans
384 So. 2d 88 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1980)
Camping Commission of the Pacific Northwest Conference of the Methodist Church v. Ocean View Land, Inc.
421 P.2d 1021 (Washington Supreme Court, 1966)
CAMP. COM'N OF PACIFIC NORTHWEST CONFERENCE OF METH. CH. v. Ocean View Land, Inc.
421 P.2d 1021 (Washington Supreme Court, 1966)
Witherall v. Strane
90 So. 2d 251 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1956)
Smith v. Duke
57 So. 2d 550 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1952)
Snyder v. Commonwealth
46 A.2d 247 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1946)
Siegenthaler v. Newton
1935 OK 998 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1935)
Capella v. Carreras Márquez
48 P.R. 811 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1935)
Crosby v. Baldwin County
148 So. 814 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1933)
Baumhauer v. Jones
140 So. 425 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1932)
Nashville, C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. Hulgan
121 So. 62 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1929)
Frye v. King County
275 P. 547 (Washington Supreme Court, 1929)
Sibley v. Hutchison
118 So. 638 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1928)
Town of Leeds v. Sharp
118 So. 572 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1928)
State Ex Rel. Davis v. Meaher
105 So. 562 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1925)
Burleson v. Town of Hamilton
104 So. 253 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1925)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
49 So. 448, 160 Ala. 461, 1909 Ala. LEXIS 73, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/east-birmingham-realty-co-v-birmingham-machine-foundry-co-ala-1909.