Clark v. Carter

BOULDIN. J.

Bill to foreclose a mortgage on lands. The only issue is payment vel non.

The note and mortgage, evidences- of the debt, were at the time of filing the bill in possession of the defendant, the maker. This was prima facie evidence of payment. Potts v. Coleman, 86 Ala. 94, 5 So. 780.

In his decree the trial court found “that the respondent, Tom E. Clark, has failed in his proof of payment of said note and mortgage.”

Appellant conceives this announcement discloses a misplacing of the burden of proof, and argues the decree should be reversed for this reason.

The quoted statement does not…