Legal Opinion · Dissent

Lehman, Durr & Co. v. Shook

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided December 15, 1881Published

Appeal from Etowah Chancery Court. Heard before Hon. II. C. Speaice. The bill in tbis cause was filed, April 25th, 1879, by Lehman, Durr & Co. against Laura E. Shook and Hester E. Hodges (formerly Shook), to bave delivered up and cancelled, as fraudulent and void, and as a cloud upon complainants’ title, a deed executed to the defendants by their father, W. T. Shook, conveying to them certain real estate situate in the town of Gadsden, and to enjoin them from further…

Read the full summary

Appeal from Etowah Chancery Court. Heard before Hon. II. C. Speaice. The bill in tbis cause was filed, April 25th, 1879, by Lehman, Durr & Co. against Laura E. Shook and Hester E. Hodges (formerly Shook), to bave delivered up and cancelled, as fraudulent and void, and as a cloud upon complainants’ title, a deed executed to the defendants by their father, W. T. Shook, conveying to them certain real estate situate in the town of Gadsden, and to enjoin them from further prosecuting an action bf ejectment, which they had commenced against the complainants for the recovery of the land conveyed in…

1Dissent

STONE, Jl,

dissenting. — Each of the parties to this suit claims under a title strictly legal. Lehman, Durr & Oo. are in possession, and the Shooks instituted an action of ejectment to dispossess them, claiming under a legal title. The title of Lehman, Durr & Co. is legal. The Shooks showed no disposition to dismiss the action of ejectment, or to relax in its prosecution. To recover in that action, they must show a paramount legal title. If the title of Lehman, Durr & Oo. is the better, then the Shooks will fail in the ejectment suit. So, the present contention presents the simple, naked…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Sherman v. FitchMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1867
  2. Peirsoll v. ElliottSupreme Court of the United States · 1832
  3. Rea v. Longstreet & SedgwickSupreme Court of Alabama · 1875
  4. Smith's v. CockrellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1880
  5. You v. FlinnSupreme Court of Alabama · 1859

19 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