Hanrick v. Thompson
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the Chancery Court at Montgomery. The bill was filed by the defendant in error, in which it is alledged, that he purchased the west half fractional section 13, township 14, range 22, from the Indian located on it, that the other half was purchased by one William Walkér, since deceased, and that the plaintiff in error, Hanrick, is executor.
Read the full summary
Error to the Chancery Court at Montgomery. The bill was filed by the defendant in error, in which it is alledged, that he purchased the west half fractional section 13, township 14, range 22, from the Indian located on it, that the other half was purchased by one William Walkér, since deceased, and that the plaintiff in error, Hanrick, is executor. That at the time of the purchase, it was agreed between Walker and himself, that the land should be equally divided between them, by running a line from north to south, which would give to each 285 acres. The purchase money paid by each, was equal…
1Opinion of the CourtOrmond, J.
We shall not enter upon the inquiry, whether there was such a note, or memorandum in writing, as would satisfy the requirements of the statute'of frauds, because, conceding such to be the fact, we think Powell is entitled to recover, upon the ground that he was a bona fide purchaser, without notice of the claim of the defendant in error, and therefore entitled to the protection of the court.
There is no ground for pretending, that either Hanrick, the executor of Walker, who had sold the land, or Powell the purchaser, had any notice of the claim set up by the defendant in error. They both…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Reed v. MunnCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1906
- Meehan v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1865
- Pepper & Co. v. GeorgeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1874
- Munn v. AcheySupreme Court of Alabama · 1895
- Dunklin v. HarveySupreme Court of Alabama · 1876
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.