Legal Opinion · Dissent

Moseley v. Neville

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided April 17, 1930No. 8 Div. 137Published

1DissentBrown, J.

“When the homestead is in a city1, town, or village, the limitation in the constitution and statutes relates to the value, and not the number and extent, of the lots.” Marx v. Threet, 131 Ala. 340, 30 So. 831, 832 ; Tyler v. Jewett, 82 Ala. 93, 2 So. 905.

The averments of 'the bill, the purpose of which is to have sold a part of the lot for division among the heirs at. law of the husband of the appellant, clearly show that the husband, prior to his death, resided on the lot as a homestead, and the only fact stated, upon which the conclusion that the part sought to be separated and sold did not…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. McDonald v. Mobile Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Alabama · 1876
  2. Tyler v. JewettSupreme Court of Alabama · 1886
  3. Jackson Realty Co. v. YeatmanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1929
  4. Westbrook v. HayesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1902
  5. Marx v. ThreetSupreme Court of Alabama · 1901

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API