Francis v. Sandlin

• Decision Date: 04 April 1907
• Citation: 43 So. 829,150 Ala. 583
• Parties: FRANCIS ET AL. v. SANDLIN ET AL.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

43 So. 829

150 Ala. 583

FRANCIS ET AL. v. SANDLIN ET AL.

Supreme Court of Alabama

April 4, 1907

Rehearing Denied May 6, 1907.

Appeal from Chancery Court, Morgan County; W. H. Simpson Chancellor.

Suit by M. E. Sandlin and others against W. R. Francis and others. From a decree overruling demurrers to the bill, defendants appeal. Affirmed.

The bill prays that the court will ascertain the interest of one Sheats in the property described in paragraph 2 of the bill and decree and compel a surrender of said deed to complainant, and that the court will decree and declare the deed held by W. R. Francis to be null and void, and order the same canceled as a cloud upon the title to the property, and that by the decree the court will ascertain and declare the interest of the joint owners or tenants in common in the said property, and order a sale of the same for distribution. The bill alleges that Benjamin Sheats died on or about the 16th day of August, 1904, seised and possessed with the following land: S.E. 1/4 of S.E. 1/4 of section 22, S.W. 1/4 of S.W 1/4 of section 23, and W. 1/2 of N.W. 1/4 of section 26, all in township 6, range 5; that said Sheats died intestate, and no administration has been had upon his estate, and that none is necessary; that said Sheats left surviving him his widow M. L. Sheats, and his children, M. E. Sandlin, J. N. Sheats Louisa Davis, and others mentioned, the interest of which in said land is set out. It is further alleged that the land cannot be equitably divided. It is also alleged that W. D Sheats has in his possession or under his control a deed executed to Benajah Sheats (called Benjamin above) by one C. C. Sheats, whereby the title to said land was conveyed to and vested in said Benajah Sheats, and that he refuses to deliver the same to complainant, and asserts some claim of right or interest in the land; but it is averred that he had no interest in, claim to, or title to said land. It is averred that W. R. Francis claims some right or interest in said land under and by virtue of certain tax deeds executed to him by the state, but that his deed is void for irregularity in the assessment and sale of said land, in that said land, valued at about $300, was offered for sale as a whole, together with a large number of lots in Decatur, New Decatur, and Hartselle, Ala., valued at $4,700, and not in parcels, and was so bought in by the state at said sale, and that the amount of taxes and costs assessed against all of the land was about $89, and the same was sold as a whole, and not offered for sale for the taxes due on each separate tax; and complainants offer and tender to Francis whatever amount the court may determine that he is equitably entitled to in payment and recompense for the money paid out by him to the state of Alabama, and it is prayed that, if he is entitled to any money, it be decreed to be paid him out of the proceeds of sale. M. L. Sheats, the widow, was stricken by amendment as a party defendant, wherever her name appears in said bill. Demurrers were interposed, raising the question that M. L. Sheats was the necessary party; that the bill is uncertain, in that it does not appear whether it seeks to cancel, as a cloud upon complainant's title, a deed executed to Francis by the tax assessor of Morgan county, or a deed executed to Francis by the state of Alabama. It appears...