Legal Opinion

Bullen v. Trulove

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided March 24, 1932No. 8 Div. 355PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtThomas, J.

Demurrers were overruled to the hill as amended; hence this appeal.

The bill as amended was within the influence of the cases for rescission of contract for fraud, cancellation of deed for fraud, reinvestment of title, for the settling of primary and secondary equities, and judgment for repayment of the purchase price. The remedy at law is insufficient for such purposes. West v. Holman, 223 Ala. 114, 134 So. 667; Hickson v. Lingold, 47 Ala. 449; Kennedy’s Heirs v. Kennedy’s Heirs, 3 Ala. 434; Nicolopoolos v. Donovan, 221 Ala. 16, 127 So. 543; Wood v. Master Schools, 221 Ala. 645, 130 So. 178;…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Hodge v. JoySupreme Court of Alabama · 1921
  2. Phillips v. Sipsey Coal Mining Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1928
  3. Hafer v. ColeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1912
  4. Merritt v. EhrmanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1896
  5. National Life Accident Ins. Co. v. PropstSupreme Court of Alabama · 1929

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Dewberry v. Bank of Standing RockSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
  2. Donald v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1934
  3. Hammac v. SkinnerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1956
  4. Hammac v. SkinnerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1956
  5. Mid-State Homes, Inc. v. JonesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1961

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API