Parsons v. Martin
This text of 86 Ala. 352 (Parsons v. Martin) 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 two notes executed to the complainant, Parsons, on November 25th, 1880, having been given by the vendee, Nelson, for the. purchase-money of the land described in the bill, were unquestionably a lien on the land, in favor of the vendor.
The assignment of one of these notes to McDonald operated to create a priority of lien in his favor, to the extent of the note so assigned; which would be entitled to a preference of payment, as a charge on the land, over the other note retained by the complainant. — Ala. Gold Life Ins. Co. v. Hall, 58 Ala. 1; White v. King, 53 Ala. 162.
The defendant, Martin, having purchased the land from Nelson, and, as a part of the consideration of the purchase, having taken up the note in McDonald’s hands, clearly was entitled to be subrogated to his rights as the holder of a prior lien, as against the complainant, Parsons.
There was no error in the decree of the chancellor, holding that the defendant had a prior lien, to the extent of the superior incumbrance which he had discharged by payment.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
86 Ala. 352, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parsons-v-martin-ala-1888.