Interstate Bank v. Wesley

59 So. 621, 178 Ala. 186, 1912 Ala. LEXIS 396
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided June 29, 1912·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinions

McCLELLAN, J.

Bill by the wife (appellee) to cancel a mortgage upon her lands, upon the averred theory that the debt (to the appellant bank) it was given to secure was the debt of her husband, and hence void under the letter of Code, § 4497.

From the face of the instrument, it appears that the indebtedness in question was the joint obligation of both complainant and her husband, E. J. Wesley.

The burden of proof was assumed by complainant, and was upon her, to establish the invalidity, of the mortgage according to the theory stated.

Upon reconsideration of the entire legal evidence on the issue, our conclusion is that the plaintiff has dis[188]*188charged the burden so assumed; that the debt for which the mortgage was given was not, in any part, the debt of the complainant.

The decree of the chancellor is therefore affirmed.

Affirmed.

Simpson, Mayfield, Sayre, and Somerville, JJ., concur. Anderson, J., dissents. Dowdell, C. J., not sitting.

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

Interstate Bank v. Wesley, 59 So. 621, 178 Ala. 186, 1912 Ala. LEXIS 396 (Ala. 1912).

59 So. 621 (Interstate Bank v. Wesley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lester v. Jacobs
103 So. 682 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1925)
Myers v. Steenberg
90 So. 302 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1921)
Hall v. Gordon
66 So. 493 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1914)
People's Bank v. Steinhart
65 So. 60 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1914)
Elkins v. Bank of Henry
60 So. 96 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1912)