Gilliland v. Armstrong
Decision Date | 13 April 1916 |
Docket Number | 8 Div. 902 |
Citation | 196 Ala. 513,71 So. 700 |
Parties | GILLILAND v. ARMSTRONG. |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from Law and Equity Court, Morgan County; Thomas W. Wert Judge.
Statutory ejectment by William Armstrong against J.A. Gilliland. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.
Sample & Kilpatrick, of Cullman, for appellant.
H.V Cashin, of Decatur, for appellee.
Statutory action in the nature of ejectment. The property in suit was assessed to Georgia Armstrong for taxation in the year 1910. She was then in possession, and there is no evidence to contradict the presumption of ownership thus raised. In November, 1910, she died leaving plaintiff (appellee), her husband, but no children. Plaintiff proved these facts and offered in evidence a decree of the probate court rendered at the May term, 1911, authorizing and directing a sale of the property by the tax collector, under the caption "Geo C. Hardwick, Tax Collector, v. Armstrong, Georgia colored." This decree was in Code form, and contained a recital that notice of the proceeding had been given as required by law. It seems that plaintiff offered the tax proceeding, as far as he went, for the purpose of showing that defendant claimed under a tax title and in anticipation of a defense under that title. In the further course of plaintiff's examination as a witness it appeared that defendant held possession under a default judgment that had been recovered by Gilliland March 23, 1914, in a previous action brought by him against plaintiff here and his tenants. By introducing this decree evidently plaintiff did not intend to conclude his own title, nor did he thereby divest himself of the right to show that, in respect of the recited notice, the decree was without the jurisdiction of the court, as in fact it was under plaintiff's uncontradicted testimony, unless its recital of notice was as matter of law conclusive against his testimony.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Ex parte Griffith
...had not the record otherwise shown that jurisdiction of the subject-matter was acquired as prescribed by statute. In Gilliland v. Armstrong, 196 Ala. 513, 71 So. 700, construing section 2272 of the Code, providing the notice proceedings for the sale of lands for delinquent taxes must be ser......
-
Grayson v. Schwab
...to some of its features. Ex parte Griffith, 209 Ala. 158, 95 So. 551; Miller v. Thompson, 209 Ala. 469, 96 So. 481; Gilliland v. Armstrong, 196 Ala. 513, 71 So. 700; Wyatt's Adm'r v. Rambo, 29 Ala. 510, Am.Dec. 89; Pettus v. McClannahan, 52 Ala. 55; 34 Corpus Juris 553. This rule has been s......
-
Hester v. First Nat. Bank, 8 Div. 963.
... ... Ex parte Griffith, 209 Ala. 158, 95 So ... 551; Driggers v. Cassady, 71 Ala. 529; McGee v ... Fleming, 82 Ala. 276, 3 So. 1; Gilliland v ... Armstrong, 196 Ala. 513, 71 So. 700 ... It is ... clear from those authorities that the proceedings here ... involved are prima ... ...
-
Ellis v. Womack
... ... essentials existing ... But ... proof of actual possession is prima facie evidence of ... ownership. Gilliland v. Armstrong, 196 Ala. 513, 71 ... So. 700; Brookside-Pratt Mining Co. v. McAlister, ... 196 Ala. 110, 72 So. 18 ... Appellants ... ...