Mink v. Whitfield
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the CourtFoster, J.
The equity of the bill is justified by section 6439 et seq. and section 6465, subsec. 5, of the Code of 1923. The Code provisions have been held to confer jurisdiction without showing independent equity, and although adverse possession is claimed by defendant. Jenkins v. Raulston, 214 Ala. 443, 108 So. 47; Camp v. Dunnavent, 215 Ala. 78, 109 So. 362; Yauger v. Taylor, ante, p. 235,118 So. 271.
The law of adverse possession prescribed by section 6069 of the Code, by its terms, does not apply to eases involving questions as to boundaries between coterminous owners. Copeland v. Warren, 214 Ala.…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Copeland v. WarrenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1926
- Hopkins v. DuggarSupreme Court of Alabama · 1920
- Shepherd v. Scott's ChapelSupreme Court of Alabama · 1927
- Garner v. BakerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1926
- Jenkins v. RaulstonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1926
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Smith v. CookSupreme Court of Alabama · 1929
- Lay v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1964
- Redwine v. JacksonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1950
- McNeil v. HaddenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1954
- Branyon v. KirkSupreme Court of Alabama · 1939
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.