Chatman v. Hall
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the Court
FOSTER, Justice.
Complainant is not required to rely on fraud to sustain her equitable claim in this case. She and her husband are alleged to have been tenants in common of real estate, giving a mortgage upon it. If he became the purchaser of that outstanding interest, directly or through a succession of transactions, it operated to the benefit of complainant, with or without fraud. The allegation of fraud is surplusage. If complainant’s husband used his own funds in acquiring the outstanding title, complainant has the right in equity to contribute her one-half of the amount so used, and…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Gilb v. O'NeillSupreme Court of Alabama · 1932
- Lehman, Durr & Co. v. MooreSupreme Court of Alabama · 1890
- Johns v. JohnsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1890
- Savage v. BradleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1907
- Williams v. MassieSupreme Court of Alabama · 1924
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Schwab v. NonidezSupreme Court of Alabama · 1964
- Cunningham v. AndressSupreme Court of Alabama · 1958
- Reed v. DunnSupreme Court of Alabama · 1981