Legal Opinion

Burns v. Austin

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided October 6, 1932No. 7 Div. 103PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.

Appellant’s first contention is that the bill as amended was subject to the objection point-' ed out by the 20th ground of demurrer, “for that the date of the death of Bethany Knox ■is not alleged with sufficient certainty.” The averment in this respect is that “Bethany Knox died intestate prior to the filing of the original bill.”

Taking the averments of the amended bill as true, which must be done on demurrer, default has been made in the payment of the entire indebtedness secured by the mortgage, and, under the stipulations, in*, the mortgage accelerating the right of foreclosure, the…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Wilks v. WilksSupreme Court of Alabama · 1912
  2. Lovelace v. HutchinsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1894
  3. People's Savings Bank v. JordanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1917
  4. Carwile v. CrumpSupreme Court of Alabama · 1910
  5. Walshe v. Dwight Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1912

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. First Nat. Bank v. BonnerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1943
  2. Waldrep v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1969
  3. Continental Casualty Co. v. BrawnerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
  4. Faircloth v. FolmarSupreme Court of Alabama · 1949
  5. Webb v. SprottSupreme Court of Alabama · 1932

5 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