Pierce v. Prude
Supreme Court of Alabama
Writ of error to the Court of Chancery for the fourth district of the northern division. The bill alleges that the complainants purchased from one William Burchfield, his right to one moiety of the west half of the north-east quarter of section 19, in township 18, of range 3 west; and also one moiety of four-sevenths of the east-half of the north-east quarter of the same section; Burchfield himself did not pretend to have the legal title to these lands, but held the bond of…
Read the full summary
Writ of error to the Court of Chancery for the fourth district of the northern division. The bill alleges that the complainants purchased from one William Burchfield, his right to one moiety of the west half of the north-east quarter of section 19, in township 18, of range 3 west; and also one moiety of four-sevenths of the east-half of the north-east quarter of the same section; Burchfield himself did not pretend to have the legal title to these lands, but held the bond of one Aquilla Pierce, conditioned to make him titles. This bond he assigned to the complainants, who exhibit it with their…
1Opinion of the CourtGoldthwaite, J.
At the first examination of this record, we were inclined to think that the decree of the Chancellor could not be sustained, because there seemed to be an entire want of proof, but then'we did not advert to the fact, that the cause was submitted on the exhibits, as well as on the bill and answers. The exhibits could have been proved viva voce, at the hearing. Levert v. Redwood, (9 Porter, 79,) and al*69though the Chancellor does not state that they were so proved, it would be most unreasonable to conclude that the fact was otherwise.
The presumption which arises, from the fact that the case is…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Levert v. RedwoodSupreme Court of Alabama · 1839
3Cited by1 opinion
- Wynn v. RosetteSupreme Court of Alabama · 1880