Legal Opinion
Ezzell v. Richardson
Supreme Court of Alabama
Decided June 5, 1930No. 8 Div. 179PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGardner, J.
The amended bill seeks the foreclosure of a real estate mortgage executed by Robert L. and William T. Richardson to John.T. and Laura O. Ezzell to secure four promissory notes due on different dates, which notes were payable to said John T. and Laura O. Ezzell jointly.
It is a well-settled rule of equity pleading that complainant’s title should be stated with sufficient clearness and certainty to enable the court to see clearly he has such a right as warrants its interference. Overton v. Moseley, 135 Ala. 599, 33 So. 696; Eutaw Ice, Water & Power Co. v. Town of Eutaw, 202 Ala. 143, 79 So. 609;…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Cockrell v. GurleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1855
- Langley v. AndrewsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1902
- Harton v. LittleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1911
- Snodgrass v. SnodgrassSupreme Court of Alabama · 1924
- Federal Land Bank v. BranscombSupreme Court of Alabama · 1925
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Adler v. First Nat. Bank of BirminghamSupreme Court of Alabama · 1937
- Boutwell v. DrinkardSupreme Court of Alabama · 1935
- Scott v. Jackson Securities & Investment Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1932
- Cobb v. StinsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1934
- Moseley v. RitterSupreme Court of Alabama · 1932
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.