McCullough v. Wise

57 Ala. 623
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided December 15, 1877·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

STONE, J.

1. The eases of Golding v. Golding (24 Ala. 122), and Russell v. Erwin (41 Ala. 292), have settled that an executor or administrator, under our statutes, has such a right to the possession of lands of his testator, or intestate, as that he can maintain ejectment for its recovery; see, also, Boynton v. McEwen, 36 Ala. 348. A title or right which will maintain ejectment, must necessarily be a good defense to one right in possession.

2. The executrix, having, with her own means, paid the debts of her testator, and there being no other assets, save his interest in the lands sued for, and the estate being in her debt on account of such payment, the heirs can not recover of her while the estate remains unsettled.

Affirmed.

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

McCullough v. Wise, 57 Ala. 623 (Ala. 1877).

57 Ala. 623 (McCullough v. Wise) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Layton v. Hamilton
107 So. 830 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1926)
Comer v. Hart
79 Ala. 389 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1885)
Watson v. Prestwood
79 Ala. 416 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1885)
Glenn's Adm'r v. Billingslea
64 Ala. 345 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1879)
Calhoun v. Fletcher
63 Ala. 574 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1879)
Masterson v. Pullen
62 Ala. 145 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1878)