Legal Opinion

Deegan v. Pake

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided January 21, 1937No. 1 Div. 924PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GARDNER, Justice.

The bill was for the sale of real estate f-or division among tenants in common, and from a final decree of sale respondent William N. Deegan has appealed.

The amended bill correctly describes the property, the interest of the respective parties therein, and discloses that an equitable division cannot be had without a sale, all of which was established by the uncontroverted proof.

Respondent Deegan, however, primarily complains that the chancellor declined, on the day the cause was submitted for final decree (February 11, 1936) to grant him a continuance and allow…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Knowles v. BlueSupreme Court of Alabama · 1923
  2. Berry v. DannellySupreme Court of Alabama · 1932
  3. Marshall v. RogersSupreme Court of Alabama · 1935
  4. Harvey v. JenkinsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1929
  5. Tommie v. City of GadsdenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1935

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Irons v. Le SueurSupreme Court of Alabama · 1986
  2. Hardee v. HardeeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1956
  3. Bean v. NorthcuttSupreme Court of Alabama · 1940
  4. Alabama Great Southern R. Co. v. BoltonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1942
  5. Lavretta v. First Nat. Bank of MobileSupreme Court of Alabama · 1939

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API