Lord v. Folmar & Son

57 Ala. 615
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedDecember 15, 1877
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 57 Ala. 615 (Lord v. Folmar & Son) 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
Lord v. Folmar & Son, 57 Ala. 615 (Ala. 1877).

Opinion

STONE, J.

The deed offered in evidence, being without a subscribing witness, and without acknowledgment, was inoperative as a conveyance of title, and should not have been received in evidence. — Code of 1876, § 2145; Hendon v. White, 52 Ala. 597.

Reversed and remanded.

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

Related

O'Neal v. Tennessee Coal, Iron & Railroad
140 Ala. 378 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1903)
Caperton v. Hall
3 So. 234 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1887)
Chadwick v. Carson
78 Ala. 116 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1884)
Doe ex dem. Evans v. Richardson
76 Ala. 329 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1884)
Dugger v. Collins
69 Ala. 324 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1881)
Stewart v. Beard
69 Ala. 470 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1881)
Stubbs v. Kahn & Brother
64 Ala. 186 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1879)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
57 Ala. 615, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lord-v-folmar-son-ala-1877.