Waller v. Mastin
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the CourtThomas, J.
The suit is for the reformation of a conveyance because of mistake of fact by the parties thereto, and resulted in a judgment for the complainants.
The rules obtaining in such matters are well understood; and the authorities are collected in Parra v. Cooper, 213 Ala. 340, 104 So. 827; Burch v. Driver, 205 Ala. 659, 88 So. 902; Orr, Scroggins & Hume v. Echols, 119 Ala. 340, 24 So. 357; Moore et al. v. Tate, 114 Ala. 582, 21 So. 820; Kelly v. Turner, 74 Ala. 513. The mistake was by reason of ignorance of legal effect. Skidmore v. Stewart, 109 Ala. 566, 75 So. 1; Hemphill v. Moody, 64 Ala. 468;…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Larkins v. BiddleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1852
- Hemphill v. MoodySupreme Court of Alabama · 1879
- Parra v. CooperSupreme Court of Alabama · 1925
- Moore v. TateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1896
- Skidmore v. StewartSupreme Court of Alabama · 1917
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Braley v. SpraginsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1930
- West End Sav. Bank v. GoodwinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1931
- Ballentine v. BradleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1938
- Clipper v. GordonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1950
- Amberson v. PattersonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.