Legal Opinion

Wilkes v. Teague

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided March 10, 1932No. 6 Div. 23, 23-APublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGardner, J.

The objections to the original bill rest upon thei assumption it is one of strict inter-pleader, requiring an assertion of perfect disinterestedness as an essential ingredient, and an attitude on the part of the complainant as a mere stakeholder, indifferent between the conflicting claimants. Missouri State Life Ins. Co. v. Robertson Banking Co., 223 Ala. 177, 134 So. 800. But we do not so construe the bill. It discloses complainants as agents of all parties to the contract (Exhibit A), the title to the lumber cut to be in complainants for the purpose of a sale and disposition of the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Groves v. SentellSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
  2. Roanoke Guano Co. v. SaundersSupreme Court of Alabama · 1911
  3. Hall v. McKellerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1908
  4. Finn v. Missouri State Life Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1931
  5. Darden's Adm'r v. Burns' Adm'rSupreme Court of Alabama · 1844

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Lavretta v. First Nat. Bank of MobileSupreme Court of Alabama · 1937
  2. Williams v. Johns-Carroll Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1939
  3. Ingram v. People's Finance Thrift Co. of AlabamaSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
  4. Dowling v. Sollie & SollieSupreme Court of Alabama · 1937

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

Powered by the Exa API