Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

212 Ala. 455

102 So 535

Austin v. Moebes

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided November 20, 1924

Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1924-11-20

Relies on Shelby Iron Co. v. Ridley

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1924-11-20

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently February 1973

9 state decisions

30192419301940195019601970decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

SAXRE, J.

¶1 The complaint and the amendment thereto gave the trial court very distinctly to understand that plaintiff was bringing bis suit to recover the statutory penalty, denounced by section 6035 of the Code of 1907, for cutting trees. The trial court cannot now be put in error on the ground that the complaint might have been sustained as a complaint in trespass without regard to the statute.

¶2 Plaintiff showed an equity in the land and the trees cut, but failed to show that the legal estate was vested in him. This court has repeatedly held that the legal title in plaintiff is necessary to the maintenance of the action. Shelby Iron Co. v. Ridley, 135 Ala. 513, 33 So. 331, and cases cited.

¶3 The court committed no error in giving judgment for the defendant, appellee.

¶4 Affirmed.

ANDERSON, O. J., and GARDNER and MILLER, JJ., concur.
/212/ala/455 · .json · Public domain