Legal Opinion

Leath v. Hancock

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided November 29, 1923No. 7 Div. 412PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSomerville, J.

The evidence in the record affords no sound basis for the finding of the trial court that the mortgage debts sought to be enforced by foreclosure are the debts of the respondent Emma D. Leath. There is nothing to show that she agreed to be bound for the payment of either of them, and the recital in the mortgage of a joint indebtedness by her and her husband is neutralized entirely by the absence of her signature ■from the notes. The mere fact that she inquired about getting a loan for her husband and herself, if she did, falls very far short of showing that she meant to bind herself and her…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Taylor & Co. v. CockrellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1885
  2. Boyd & Co. v. Jones & PopeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1892
  3. Larry v. BrownSupreme Court of Alabama · 1907

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Dewberry v. Bank of Standing RockSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933
  2. Lester v. JacobsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1925
  3. Alabama Chemical Co. v. HallSupreme Court of Alabama · 1926
  4. Smith v. D. Rothschild Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1924
  5. Alabama Farm Bureau Credit Corporation v. HelmsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1933

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

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

Powered by the Exa API