Stovall v. Fowler

72 Ala. 77
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
DecidedDecember 15, 1882
StatusPublished
Cited by18 cases

This text of 72 Ala. 77 (Stovall v. Fowler) 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.

Bluebook
Stovall v. Fowler, 72 Ala. 77 (Ala. 1882).

Opinion

BRICKELL, 0. J.

-The validity of the title derived from the sale for the payment of taxes is not, in this case, a material inquiry. The conveyance obtained under it was admissible as color of title, and to show the extent of the possession which had been taken and held by the purchaser and his vendee. When there is an entry upon lands under color of title, by deed or other instrument in writing, and a continuous occupancy, in legal contemplation, there is “ actual possession to the extent of the boundaries contained in the writing; and' this, though the title' conveyed is good for nothing.”—2 Smith’s Lead. Oases (5 Am. Ed.), 563; Allen v. Kellam, 69 Ala. 442.

2. The exceptions to the instructions given, and to the in[79]*79structions refused, are too general to avail the appellant, unless it could be asserted there is error in all the instructions given, and that all requested embody correct legal propositions applicable to the evidence.—Elliott v. Stocks, 67 Ala. 336; Cohen v. The State, 50 Ala. 108. Without entering upon a discussion of the instructions, it is apparent this can not be asserted in reference to them.

Let the judgment be affirmed.

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

Related

Pfaffman v. Case
66 So. 2d 890 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1953)
Witherspoon v. Brummett
176 P.2d 187 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1946)
Aiken v. McMillan
106 So. 150 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1925)
McCay v. Parks
79 So. 119 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1918)
Brannan v. Henry
142 Ala. 698 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1904)
Bailey v. Blacksher Co.
142 Ala. 254 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1904)
Tennessee Coal, Iron & Railroad v. Linn
123 Ala. 112 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1898)
Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Railway v. Mathis
109 Ala. 377 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1895)
Torrey v. Forbes
94 Ala. 135 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1891)
Alexander v. Savage
90 Ala. 383 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1890)
Wilson v. Atkinson
20 P. 66 (California Supreme Court, 1888)
Phœnix Insurance v. Moog
81 Ala. 335 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1886)
Doe ex dem. Hooper v. Clayton
81 Ala. 391 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1886)
Doe ex dem. Hughes v. Anderson
79 Ala. 209 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1885)
Woods v. State
76 Ala. 35 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1884)
Watson v. Mancill
76 Ala. 600 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1884)
Burks v. Mitchell
78 Ala. 61 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1884)
Bedwell v. Bedwell
77 Ala. 587 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1884)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
72 Ala. 77, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stovall-v-fowler-ala-1882.