Spence v. Duren
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the Chancery Court, sitting at Talladega. THIS was a bill in chancery, filed by the plaintiff in error against the defendants in error.
Read the full summary
Error to the Chancery Court, sitting at Talladega. THIS was a bill in chancery, filed by the plaintiff in error against the defendants in error. The complainant, by his bill, alleges that he made a contract with Duren and Copeland, two of the defendants, for the purchase of a half section of land, at the price of five thousand dollars, of which sum, one half was paid down, and executed his notes for the residue, in two equal annual- payments ; and on the 13th March, 1835, Duren and Copeland executed their bond to make title to the land, on the maturity of the notes.— He further alleges that…
1Opinion of the CourtOrmond, J.
The principal question presented by this bill, was much considered by-us at the last term of this Court, in the case of Young v. Harris, adm’r. We then held that, “ where one was induced to purchase land by the fraudulent representations of the vendor, in relation to the title, the falsehood of which, he had no means of ascertaining by the exercise of ordinary diligence, he may have relief in chancery before eviction, and without abondonment of possession.” The only charge in the bill in this case, which could be supposed to impute fraud to the vendors, is, to the following effect:
That at the…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Seals v. Robinson & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1883
- Kendall v. WellsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1906
- Duckworth v. Duckworth's Adm'rSupreme Court of Alabama · 1859
- Read v. WalkerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1850
- Kelly's Heirs v. AllenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1859
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.