Christopher v. Goode, 8 Div. 453.
| Decision Date | 23 March 1933 |
| Docket Number | 8 Div. 453. |
| Citation | 146 So. 881,226 Ala. 338 |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
| Parties | CHRISTOPHER v. GOODE. |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Limestone County; James E. Horton, Judge.
Bill by Ola Goode against Jackson P. Christopher and others, for reformation of description and foreclosure of a mortgage. From a decree overruling a demurrer to the bill, the named respondent appeals.
Affirmed.
Fred Wall, of Athens, for appellant.
J. G. Rankin, of Athens, for appellee.
The bill seeks reformation of description in a mortgage and its foreclosure. No fraud is charged and the reformation rests upon the theory of a mutual mistake. Its sufficiency in this respect is the only matter here presented.
We recognize the rule, as noted by appellant's counsel, requiring particularity of averment in cases of this character (Webb v. Sprott, 225 Ala. 600, 144 So. 569); but our cases are to the effect the rule does not call for a strained and unreasonable construction of the language used or undue refinement or nicety of pleading. The bill is to be construed as a whole, and its wording given a reasonable and not unnatural construction. National Union Fire Ins. Co. v. Lassetter, 224 Ala. 649, 141 So. 645; Eastis v. Beasley, 214 Ala. 651, 108 So. 763; Warren v. Crow, 195 Ala. 568, 71 So. 92; Camper v. Rice, 201 Ala. 579, 78 So. 923. So considered, the bill, with particular reference to the averments found in paragraph 4, sufficiently meets the requirements of our rule of pleading.
The decree is correct, and will accordingly be here affirmed.
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gilmore v. Sexton
...of range 2 west'', was sufficient allegation of a mutuality of mistake in the description of the deed. In the case of Christopher v. Goode, 226 Ala. 338, 146 So. 881, 882, the following allegations were held sufficient as against demurrer in stating a case for the reformation of a mortgage ......
-
Clipper v. Gordon
...651, 108 So. 763; Camper v. Rice, 201 Ala. 579, 78 So. 923; Snider v. J. E. Freeman & Co., 214 Ala. 295, 107 So. 815; Christopher v. Goode, 226 Ala. 338, 146 So. 881; Phoenix Chair Co. v. Daniel, 228 Ala. 579, 155 So. The bill in this case avers, in substance, (1) that the Misses Jackson, w......
-
Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Engel Realty Co.
...not call for a strained and unreasonable construction of the language used or undue refinement or nicety of pleading. Christopher v. Goode, 226 Ala. 338, 146 So. 881. bill is to be construed as a whole and given a reasonable and not unnatural construction. So considered the bill, with parti......
-
Foster v. Williamson
...party writing the mortgage, is sufficiently made to appear, and meets the requirement of good pleading as here approved. Christopher v. Goode, 226 Ala. 338, 146 So. 881, authorities therein noted. The bill has an independent equity for the foreclosure of the mortgage, and a prior demand for......