Jackson v. Jackson
This text of 85 So. 482 (Jackson v. Jackson) 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.
Opinion
The complainant’s bill seeks to have a deed by him to one of these respondents, T. J. Spear, absolute upon its face, declared a mortgage and to redeem, and he testified in support of this contention. The respondent Spear claims, and so testified in effect, that the deed was never intended as a mortgage, but was a straight out sale of the land, though he did agree to resell the same to the complainant, if he saw fit to repurchase by the 25th of the following December, and which he did not do. According to the respondent’s theory of the transaction, the deed in question was never intended by both parties as a mortgage, and there was evidence in support of this theory, notwithstanding the complainant’s proof was to the effect that the deed was intended as a mortgage. The witnesses were examined ore tenus and were heard and seen by the trial court, and, as its conclusion was like unto the verdict of a jury, we are not prepared to say that the same was contrary to the great weight of the evidence. Fitzpatrick v. Stringer, 200 Ala. 574, 76 South. 932. The decree of the circuit court is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
85 So. 482, 204 Ala. 257, 1920 Ala. LEXIS 118, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jackson-v-jackson-ala-1920.