Pulliam v. Hicks
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from Tallapoosa Chancery Court. Heard before Hon. Richard B. Kelly. Bill for tbe foreclosure of a mortgage executed by W. C. Pulliam and Maria Pulliam to Hicks, Lee & Co., a firm composed of T. A. Hicks, A. B. Lee and J. E. Heard, and transferred to T. A. Hicks, tbe complainant. The defendant Maria Pulliam filed a cross-bill, alleging that said mortgage was given on ber property to secure ber husband’s debt, and praying a cancellation thereof for this reason.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Tallapoosa Chancery Court. Heard before Hon. Richard B. Kelly. Bill for tbe foreclosure of a mortgage executed by W. C. Pulliam and Maria Pulliam to Hicks, Lee & Co., a firm composed of T. A. Hicks, A. B. Lee and J. E. Heard, and transferred to T. A. Hicks, tbe complainant. The defendant Maria Pulliam filed a cross-bill, alleging that said mortgage was given on ber property to secure ber husband’s debt, and praying a cancellation thereof for this reason. Hicks, Lee, Heard and one Slaughter all testified that the consideration of tbe mortgage was money loaned to Maria Pulliam to…
1Opinion of the CourtTyson, J.
— The question involved on this review is one of fact. It is whether the mortgage sought to be foreclosed by the original bill and to be cancelled by the cross-bill of Mariali Pulliam was made to secure the debt of W. C. Pulliam, the husband. The note and mortgage purport to be the joint obligations of both Mariah and her husband. The fact that, the husband’s name appears to have been subscribed first and the wife’s last is of no significance. No presumption, either of law or fact, can be indulged on that account, that he was the principal and she the surety.—Summerhill v. Tapp, 52 Ala. 227.…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Summerhill v. TappSupreme Court of Alabama · 1875
3Cited by3 opinions
- Wetmore & Morse Granite Co. v. RyleSupreme Court of Vermont · 1919
- Robbins v. BrownSupreme Court of Alabama · 1907
- Smith v. American Nat. BankSupreme Court of Alabama · 1934