Griffin v. Hall

• Decision Date: 13 February 1901
• Parties: GRIFFIN ET AL. v. HALL ET AL.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

29 So. 783

129 Ala. 289

GRIFFIN ET AL. v. HALL ET AL.

Supreme Court of Alabama

February 13, 1901

Appeal from circuit court, Pike county; John P. Hubbard, Judge.

Action by J. L. Hall and L. B. Farley against G. A. Griffin and J T. Ramage. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendants appeal. Affirmed.

The cause was tried upon issue joined upon the plea of the general issue. Upon the trial of the cause the plaintiff showed that they recovered a judgment against one H. Foreman on November 2, 1893; that in December, 1893, an execution was issued upon said judgment, and returned to the next term of the court "No property found"; that on April 26 1899, an alias execution was issued on said judgment, and on the same day was levied on the lands sued for in this case as the property of the defendant in execution, H. Foreman; that on May 29, 1899, the sheriff sold the land, and the plaintiffs in the present suit became the purchasers. Upon the examination of H. Foreman as a witness, he testified that he was never in the actual occupancy or possession of the storehouse in question; that after he built it he leased it to one Logan; that at the time of the recovery of the judgment he had ceased to claim said storehouse, but that his tenant was still occupying it, having attorned to the defendant J. A. Griffin, who purchased the store from him. It was further shown by the testimony of the defendant Griffin that in March, 1893, he purchased the storehouse and land sued for from Foreman, who made him a deed thereto, but that said deed was never recorded until 1899; that upon the purchase of the store by him the defendant Logan, who was then a tenant of Foreman, attorned to him, and paid him the rent for the balance of the term of his lease, which was September 1, 1893; that on September 1, 1893, the defendant Griffin rented the store to Logan for another year, and that Logan had continued to rent the store and occupy it up to September, 1899, when the defendant Ramage went into possession as the agent of the defendant Griffin. Upon the introduction of all the evidence, the court gave the general affirmative charge for the plaintiffs. The defendants duly excepted to the giving of this charge, and also excepted to the court's refusal to give the general affirmative charge requested by them.

M. N Carlisle, for appellants.

Harmon Dent & Weil, for appellees.

TYSON J.

It is undoubtedly a sound proposition of law that, if the defendant in execution has no interest or estate in the land sold, the purchaser at such execution sale acquires no title. Clements v. Pearce, 63 Ala. 284. However, as against judgment creditors and purchasers having no notice thereof an unrecorded conveyance made by defendant in execution is void. Code 1886, §§ 1005, 1006. Notwithstanding such conveyance operates to transmit the title inter partes, as against judgment creditors and purchasers without notice no title passes, and the defendant's estate or interest is subject to sale under execution. The only question here presented is whether the...