Hughes v. Bullen
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the CourtAnderson, C. J.
The appellant, by next friend, filed a bill to cancel a mortgage held by this appellee upon the ground that he was a non compos mentis at the time of executing same. It may. be doubtful as to whether or not the appellant, though weak-minded, was, at the time the mortgage was executed, incapable of making a valid contract even according to the evidence of the Medical men, which is the most favorable to his contention, within the rule declared in the case of In re Carmichael, 36 Ala. 514, a point we may concede, however, only for the purpose of deciding this case, for the reason that this…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- In re CarmichaelSupreme Court of Alabama · 1860
- Alexander v. LivingstonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1921
- Hale v. HaleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1917
- Thomas v. HoldenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1915
3Cited by8 opinions
- Pacific Finance Corp. v. HendleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. BramlettSupreme Court of Alabama · 1932
- Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of United States v. WelchSupreme Court of Alabama · 1940
- McDaniel v. MellenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1931
- Washam v. BeatySupreme Court of Alabama · 1923
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.