Legal Opinion

Baldwin v. Harrelson

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided October 6, 1932No. 4 Div. 585PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPoster, J.

The bill in this case, to settle and determine a disputed boundary line, does not contain more than the statutory requirements. Section 6439 et seq., and § 6465, subd. 5, Code. It does not go so far as to describe the true line, nor allege that it is unknown to complainant. Ordinarily this should be done. Smith v. Bachus, 195 Ala. 8, 70 So. 261. But its absence does not deprive the court of jurisdiction, and is not fatal to relief when there is no demurrer on that ground. Smith v. Cook, 220 Ala. 338, 124 So. 898.

When such a bill seeks only the statutory relief, the complainant, upon proving…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Smith v. CookSupreme Court of Alabama · 1929
  2. Smith v. BachusSupreme Court of Alabama · 1915
  3. Yauger v. TaylorSupreme Court of Alabama · 1928
  4. Hopkins v. DuggarSupreme Court of Alabama · 1920
  5. Clarke v. EarnestSupreme Court of Alabama · 1932

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

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Branyon v. KirkSupreme Court of Alabama · 1939
  2. Limbaugh v. ComerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1956
  3. Stansell v. TharpSupreme Court of Alabama · 1944
  4. Wood v. FosterSupreme Court of Alabama · 1934
  5. Ray v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1980

18 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