Legal Opinion

Waller v. Mastin

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided January 23, 1930No. 3 Div. 902PublishedCited by 7 opinions

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

  1. Larkins v. BiddleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1852
  2. Hemphill v. MoodySupreme Court of Alabama · 1879
  3. Parra v. CooperSupreme Court of Alabama · 1925
  4. Moore v. TateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1896
  5. Skidmore v. StewartSupreme Court of Alabama · 1917

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Braley v. SpraginsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1930
  2. West End Sav. Bank v. GoodwinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1931
  3. Ballentine v. BradleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1938
  4. Clipper v. GordonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1950
  5. Amberson v. PattersonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933

2 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