From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cottingham v. Love

Supreme Court of Alabama
Apr 24, 1924
99 So. 907 (Ala. 1924)

Opinion

2 Div. 793.

April 24, 1924.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Bibb County; S. F. Hobbs, Judge.

Ellison Dominick, of Birmingham, for appellants.

Counsel assert that the authorities are to the contrary of the doctrine of the demurrers to the bill.

Percy, Benners Burr, of Birmingham, for appellee.

Appellant confesses that there is no merit in the appeal. It should be affirmed.


Appellee, as a life tenant to an undivided interest in certain lands situated in Bibb county, filed this bill against appellants for a sale of said lands for division among the joint owners thereof. Appellants' demurrer takes the point that such life tenant could not maintain a bill of this character. The life tenancy is as to a fractional interest in the land, and the demurrer to the bill was properly overruled, under the following, among other, authorities: McQueen v. Turner, 91 Ala. 273, 8 So. 863; Fitts v. Craddock, 144 Ala. 437, 39 So. 506, 113 Am. St. Rep. 53; Fies v. Rosser, 162 Ala. 504, 50 So. 287; Hollis v. Watkins, 181 Ala. 248, 61 So. 893; Jordan v. Walker, 201 Ala. 248, 77 So. 838; Wheat v. Wheat, 190 Ala. 461, 67 So. 417; Chapman v. York, 208 Ala. 274, 94 So. 90.

The decree of the court below will therefore be here affirmed.

Affirmed.

ANDERSON, C. J., and SAYRE and MILLER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Cottingham v. Love

Supreme Court of Alabama
Apr 24, 1924
99 So. 907 (Ala. 1924)
Case details for

Cottingham v. Love

Case Details

Full title:COTTINGHAM et al. v. LOVE

Court:Supreme Court of Alabama

Date published: Apr 24, 1924

Citations

99 So. 907 (Ala. 1924)
99 So. 907

Citing Cases

Shrout v. Seale

The life tenancy is as to a fractional interest in the land, and the demurrer to the bill was properly…

McGlathery v. Meeks

Allen Dortch and Inzer, Inzer Davis, all of Gadsden, for appellant. A life tenant who has a joint interest in…