From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

WALKER v. ROE

Supreme Court of Alabama
Dec 18, 1975
323 So. 2d 349 (Ala. 1975)

Opinion

SC 1281.

November 13, 1975. Rehearing Denied December 18, 1975.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Blount County, H. E. Holladay, J.

Phil Joiner, Birmingham, for appellant.

Burden of proof adverse and exclusive possession is on the one asserting. Spradling v. May, 259 Ala. 10, 65 So.2d 494; Walthall v. Yohn, 252 Ala. 262, 40 So.2d 705. The trial court erred in the final decree, and in consideration of the evidence in the cause in ruling and holding in effect, that the mere possession of the purchaser (W. H. Barber), of the land subject of the suit, for a period of twenty years, gave him title thereto by prescription, irrespective of the character and legal limitations of his possession. Sec. 153, Title 7, Code of Ala. 1958; Swafford v. Brasher, 246 Ala. 636, 22 So.2d 24.

Nash, NeSmith Walker, Oneonta, for appellees.

Where evidence is heard orally before the trial court, the finding of the court has the effect of a jury's verdict, and if fairly supported by credible evidence under any reasonable aspect, it will not be disturbed on appeal, unless plainly erroneous. Chrisman v. Brooks, 291 Ala. 237, 279 So.2d 500; Jackson v. Rodda, 291 Ala. 569, 285 So.2d 77; Jones v. Boothe, 270 Ala. 420, 119 So.2d 203; Skinner v. Todd, 283 Ala. 279, 215 So.2d 721; Hayes v. Kennedy, 292 Ala. 362, 294 So.2d 739.


Appellant Walker brought suit to sell certain land in Blount County for division.

After hearing evidence ore tenus the trial court denied the relief sought by appellant. The court found that appellee Barber purchased the land in December, 1952, and went into actual possession at that time. He further found that Barber and his tenants have remained in actual possession for a period in excess of twenty years. Morris v. Yancey, 267 Ala. 657, 104 So.2d 553.

When evidence is heard orally the finding of the trial court has the effect of a jury verdict and if fairly supported by credible evidence will not be disturbed on appeal, unless plainly erroneous. Ala. Digest, Appeal and Error, Key 1009.

There is ample evidence to support the judgment of the trial court.

The judgment is therefore affirmed.

Affirmed.

HEFLIN, C. J., and BLOODWORTH, FAULKNER and EMBRY, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

WALKER v. ROE

Supreme Court of Alabama
Dec 18, 1975
323 So. 2d 349 (Ala. 1975)
Case details for

WALKER v. ROE

Case Details

Full title:Robert H. WALKER v. Wesley H. ROE et al

Court:Supreme Court of Alabama

Date published: Dec 18, 1975

Citations

323 So. 2d 349 (Ala. 1975)
323 So. 2d 349

Citing Cases

Moss v. Moss

Whether there is sufficient evidence to uphold the issues of fact determined by the trial court. Walker v.…

Hudson v. DuraWear Corp.

The findings of fact of the trial court sitting without a jury are entitled to the same weight as a jury…