Prickett & Maddox v. Sibert
This text of 71 Ala. 194 (Prickett & Maddox v. Sibert) 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
This is a bill filed to enforce a vendor’s lien on certain lands which are described in the note for the purchase-money. The complainant claims as transferee of the note by delivery merely, and not by written assignment.
The transfer was made prior to the act of February 13th, 1879 (Pamph. Acts, 1878-79, p. 171), which expressly authorizes such transactions either by writing or delivery. Under the decisions of this court, therefore, it did not carry, with it the right to enforce the vendor’s lien on the land in controversy. Bankhead v. Owen, 60 Ala. 457; Hightower v. Rigsby, 56 Ala. 126.
The case of Bryant v. Stephens, 58 Ala. 636, it is true, holds that an equitable mortgage is created where the lands are described in the note given for the purchase-money. But this case has been expressly overruled by this court in the recent case of Tedder v. Steele, 70 Ala. 347.
The decree of the chancellor 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
71 Ala. 194, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/prickett-maddox-v-sibert-ala-1881.