Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

211 Ala. 152

99 So 907

Cottingham v. Love

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided April 24, 1924

Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1924-04-24

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently June 1971

2 state decisions

Relies on Wheat v. Wheat · Fitts v. Craddock · McQueen v. Turner

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1924-04-24

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

GARDNER, J.

¶1 Appellee, as a life tenant to an undivided interest in certain lands situated in Bibb county, filed this bill against appellants for a sale of said lands for division among the joint owners thereof. Appellants’ demurrer takes the point that such life tenant could not maintain a bill of this character. The life tenancy is as to a fractional interest in the land, and the demurrer to the bill was properly overruled, under the following, among other, authorities: McQueen v. Turner, 91 Ala. 273, 8 South. 863; Fitts v. Craddock, 144 Ala. 437, 39 South. 506, 113 Am. St. Rep. 53; Fies v. Rosser, 162 Ala. 504, 50 South. 287; Hollis v. Watkins, 181 Ala. 248, 61 South. 893; Jordan v. Walker, 201 Ala. 248, 77 South. 838; Wheat v. Wheat, 190 Ala. 461, 67 South. 417; Chapman v. York, 208 Ala. 274, 94 South. 90.

¶2 The decree of the court below will therefore be here affirmed.

¶3 Affirmed.

ANDERSON, C. J., and SAYRE and MILDER, JJ., concur.
/211/ala/152 · .json · Public domain