Legal Opinion

Hamby v. Stepleton

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided June 14, 1930No. 7 Div. 951PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAnderson, C. J.

The last amended or substituted bill of complaint expressly renounces any claim tó relief upon the idea of a prescriptive right to the use of the road. Nor does it show a right to the road under an express valid grant as the agreement relied upon was oral and not binding upon the respondent. Hicks v. Swift Creek Mill Co., 133 Ala. 411, 31 So. 947, 57 L. R. A. 720, 91 Am. St. Rep. 38. The fact, however, that the parties discussed the road and the question of keeping the same open at the time of the purchase of the land by the complainant from the respondent was an evidential fact that the road…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Trump v. McDonnellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1898
  2. Hicks Bros. v. Swift Creek Mill Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1901
  3. Walker v. CliffordSupreme Court of Alabama · 1900
  4. Greenwood v. WestSupreme Court of Alabama · 1911

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Aland v. GrahamSupreme Court of Alabama · 1971
  2. Lynn v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1940
  3. Bull v. SalsmanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1983
  4. Birmingham Trust & Savings Co. v. MasonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1930
  5. Scruggs v. BeasonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1945

16 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