Legal Opinion

McBride McMillian v. Kyle.

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided April 6, 1922No. 8 Div. 444PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMcCLELLAN, J.

Detinue instituted by appellee against appellants to recover a mule. The mule belonged to appellants. The appellee later bought the mule, for a cash consideration, on the streets of Huntsville. He claimed to be, and was by the court below held, an innocent purchaser ior value and without notice

On a fraudulent order, over the forged signature of “J. H. Bowers,” promising to join in a mortgage to secure the purchase price, appellants delivered the mule to a darky named Lucket. One of the appellants testified that no sale of the mule was then or later made; but, to the contrary, the delivery of…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Moore & Co. v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1878
  2. Peterson & Co. v. Steiner Bros.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1895
  3. Lightman v. BoydSupreme Court of Alabama · 1902

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Moore v. LongSupreme Court of Alabama · 1947
  2. Warrant Warehouse Co. v. CookSupreme Court of Alabama · 1922
  3. Prosser v. BailesAlabama Court of Appeals · 1949

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

Powered by the Exa API