Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Missouri State Life Ins. Co. v. Robertson Banking Co.

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided April 16, 1931No. 2 Div. 979PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGardner, J.

One of the prime requisites of a bill of interpleader is the disinterestedness of the complainant in the subject-matter of the suit. He must stand in relation thereto as a mere stakeholder, indifferent between the conflicting claimants. Crass v. Memphis & C. R. Co., 96 Ala. 447, 11 So. 480; Wheeler v. Armstrong, 164 Ala. 442, 51 So. 268; Enterprise Lumber Co. v. First Nat. Bank, 181 Ala. 388, 61 So. 930; Phillips v. Sipsey Coal Min. Co., 218 Ala. 296, 118 So. 513; Sov. Camp., W. O. W., v. Partridge, 221 Ala. 75, 127 So. 505; Anniston Lbr. & Mfg. Co. v. Kirkland, 220 Ala. 148, 124 So. 207 ; 4…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Phillips v. Sipsey Coal Mining Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1928
  2. Crass v. Memphis & Charleston RailroadSupreme Court of Alabama · 1892
  3. Finn v. Missouri State Life Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1931
  4. Wheeler v. ArmstrongSupreme Court of Alabama · 1909
  5. Enterprise Lumber Co. v. First Nat. BankSupreme Court of Alabama · 1913

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Harden v. BarbareeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1939
  2. Marcus v. People's Sav. BankSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
  3. Steele v. First Nat. Bank of MobileSupreme Court of Alabama · 1936
  4. Brown v. CurtinSupreme Court of Missouri · 1932
  5. First Nat. Bak of Clanton v. McKeeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933

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

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

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API