Mayfield v. Cook

82 So. 9, 203 Ala. 48
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Mayfield v. Cook. Read the opinion of the Court — 203 Ala. 49
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided February 13, 1919·No. 3 Div. 372·Published

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of this cause in consultation by the whole court, the majority, consisting of Chief Justice ANDERSON, Associate Justices McCLELLAN, SAXRE, and THOMAS, entertain the view that the assignment of demurrer, taking the point that the bill does not show there was sufficient personalty with which to pay the debts of the estate, was well taken and properly sustained. They are of the opinion that the debts should not be required by a court to be paid out of the real estate in order to leave the personalty free for application to the complainant’s alleged contractual rights, and that to so require would be permitting that to be done indirectly which was held on former appeal could not be done directly.

The holding of the majority results in an affirmance of the decree of the court below.

Affirmed.

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

Mayfield v. Cook, 82 So. 9, 203 Ala. 48 (Ala. 1919).

82 So. 9 (Mayfield v. Cook) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Owens v. McNally
45 P. 710 (California Supreme Court, 1896)
Gorman v. McDonnell
28 So. 964 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1900)