McGehee's Administrator v. Peterson
This text of 57 Ala. 333 (McGehee's Administrator v. Peterson) 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
According to the evidence set out in this . record, and the contract between appellant and Boggers, the assignor of appellee, the former was in possession — if not .. exclusively as owner, at least as tenant in common, during the year with the latter.—Thompson v. Mawhinney et al. 17 Ala. 363 ; Bennett v. Bullock, 35 Penn. St. 364. In such a relation of the parties towards each other and to the land, ■.the action of trespass quare clausum fregit could not be maintained by Peterson against McGehee for the acts of [335]*335■■‘damage complained of. Peterson was not expelled from the premises; and he was not in exclusive possession of them. If there was any wrong done to him by such acts, his remedy for it was by action on the case.—Bennett v. Bullock, supra; Cabett v. Porter, 8 B. & C. 268; Booth v. Adams, 11 Verm. 156 ; Duncan v. Sylvester, 1 Shepl. (13 Me.) 417.
The judgment of the City Court must be reversed, and -.the cause remanded.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
57 Ala. 333, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcgehees-administrator-v-peterson-ala-1876.