Gillespie v. Gillespie

• Decision Date: 06 February 1907
• Citation: 43 So. 12,149 Ala. 184
• Parties: GILLESPIE ET AL. v. GILLESPIE.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

43 So. 12

149 Ala. 184

GILLESPIE ET AL. v. GILLESPIE.

Supreme Court of Alabama

February 6, 1907

Appeal from Chancery Court, Jefferson County; Alfred H. Benners Chancellor.

Bill by James M. Gillespie, administrator of the estate of John G Gillespie, deceased, against James M. Gillespie, Jr., and others. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal. Affirmed.

This was a bill filed by the administrator of John G. Gillespie against a number of respondents, seeking to sell for division certain lands mentioned in the bill. The allegations are that John Gillespie was a resident of said county and died before the filing of the bill, and that his wife, Martha C Gillespie, was dead, and that both died without issue. The heirs are alleged to be the brothers and sisters of the deceased, and the children of such brothers and sisters as are dead, all of whom, together with their interest in the land, are set out in the bill. It is further alleged that owing to the number of heirs and the smallness of some of the shares, together with the fact that about 75 acres of land is improved and the balance unimproved, and also the further fact that deceased had conveyed the mineral interest in part of said lands, an equitable division of the same cannot be made without sale, and that Mary Miller and others of said heirs desire the same to be sold. It is also alleged that the personal assets of the estate are more than sufficient to pay the claims and debts against the said estate and the cost of administration. The respondent James Gillespie admitted the death of the owner of the land, but asserted that before his death, and for more than ten years before his death, decedent had given him a certain 70 acres of said land, and that he had gone upon it and continued in adverse possession of the same for more than 10 years next before the filing of the bill, and that he had occupied the same continuously as his own. The tendencies of the evidence are set out in the opinion. The chancellor decreed a sale of the land and the other relief prayed for, and also decreed that the respondent James Gillespie was entitled to a lien upon the 70 acres of land claimed by him for the present value of all improvements, betterments, and enhancements erected or created by him.

George Huddleston and John D. Strange, for appellants.

J. G Crews and John W. Tomlinson, for appellee.

McCLELLAN J.

He who enters into the possession of...