Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Eppes v. Thompson

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided April 4, 1918No. 6 Div. 677Published

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County; Hugh A. Locke, Judge. Suit by IS. E. Thompson against T. D. Eppes to foreclose a m.ortgage, and for a deficiency decree. From a decree for complainant, respondent appeals.

1Concurrence

ANDERSON, C. .1.

While I concur in the conclusion reached in this case, I do not fully indorse the opinion of the majority and prefer basing my opinion on the following propositions: There is no doubt of the fact that Thompson Bros. & Go-., in conjunction with Ebersole and Tyler or through them perpetrated a fraud upon the respondent Eppes, by the insertion in the deed from Ebersole to him a clause whereby the said Eppes assumed payment of the pre-existing mortgages. Indeed, the books present but few, if any, cases disclosing what might be termed a more complete “frame-up” by a set of city…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Hickey v. McDonald Bros.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1909

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

Powered by the Exa API