Sidel v. Elyton Land Co.
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the City Court of Birmingham. Tried before the ITon. H. A. Sharpe. cited Harper v. Claxton, 62- Ala. 46; Lea v. Cassen, 61 Ala. 312; King v. Martin, 67 Ala. 177; Railroad Co. v. Felrath,67 Ala. 189; Blythe v. Bar-gin, 68 Ala. 377; 3 Am. cfc Eng. Ency. Law, 824; Marks v. Cowles, 53 Ala. 499; Sharp v. Sharp, 76 Ala. 320; 2 Bright’s H. & W. 38; Flinn v. Barber, 64 Ala. 193; Copeland v. Kehoe, 57 Ala. 248; White v. Franklin Bank, 22 Pick.; 12 Wall. 349. cited Br.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the City Court of Birmingham. Tried before the ITon. H. A. Sharpe. cited Harper v. Claxton, 62- Ala. 46; Lea v. Cassen, 61 Ala. 312; King v. Martin, 67 Ala. 177; Railroad Co. v. Felrath,67 Ala. 189; Blythe v. Bar-gin, 68 Ala. 377; 3 Am. cfc Eng. Ency. Law, 824; Marks v. Cowles, 53 Ala. 499; Sharp v. Sharp, 76 Ala. 320; 2 Bright’s H. & W. 38; Flinn v. Barber, 64 Ala. 193; Copeland v. Kehoe, 57 Ala. 248; White v. Franklin Bank, 22 Pick.; 12 Wall. 349. cited Br. Bank v. Parish, 20 Ala. 433; Wilder v. Abernathy, 64 Ala. 644;’ Vance v. Nagle, 70 Penn St-. 176; Heflin v. Milton, 69 Ala.…
1Opinion of the CourtClopton, J.
— This suit, which is an action for money had and received brought by the appellant against the appellee, was tried in the City Court without a jury, on an agreed statement of facts, and judgment rendered for defendant. The admitted facts may be stated as follows : The husband *370of plaintiff negotiated with defendant for the purchase of a lot of land near the cby of Birmingham; which negotiations terminated in the purchase of the lot for $4,347, one fourth cash, and the balance in three equal annual payments. The contract of sale and purchase was consummated, August 13, 1887, in the manner…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Harden v. Darwin & PulleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1880
- Hungerford v. MooreSupreme Court of Alabama · 1880
3Cited by1 opinion
- McAnally v. HeflinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1894