Cates v. Johnson
Supreme Court of Alabama
■ Appeal from the. Chancery Court of Marshall. Heard before the. Hon. S.- K. McSpadden. The averments of the bill in this case showed that the complainants and the defendants had unequal interests in the tract of land in which they were tenants in common.
Read the full summary
■ Appeal from the. Chancery Court of Marshall. Heard before the. Hon. S.- K. McSpadden. The averments of the bill in this case showed that the complainants and the defendants had unequal interests in the tract of land in which they were tenants in common. As to the impracticability of an equitable partition of the land, the bill averred as follows : “That said real estate can not be equitably divided or partitioned into shares, so as to do justice and equity to all the parties in interest, without a sale of said real estate; because said lands are partly cleared and worn out; that, where…
1Opinion of the CourtMcOLELLAN, J.
This bill was filed by Benjamin P. Johnson and others against William Cates and others, all the parties being tenants in common in a certain tract of land, for a sale thereof for division. Cates alone answered j admitting the tenancy in common, but denying the alleged necessity for a sale. The decree granted the relief prayed, and Cates alone, and in his own name only, prosecutes his appeal from that decree, and assigns error in this court.
One assignment of. error is that the “court erred in proceeding to a final decree in the cause without the defendants Benjamin Johnson, James Johnson, K.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- McDowell v. JonesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1877
- Walker v. JonesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1853
- Gore v. DickinsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1893
- Fennell v. TuckerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1873
- Ward v. CorbettSupreme Court of Alabama · 1882
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Smith v. HillSupreme Court of Alabama · 1910
- Finch v. SmithSupreme Court of Alabama · 1906