Guice v. Barr

• Decision Date: 14 June 1901
• Citation: 130 Ala. 570,30 So. 563
• Parties: GUICE v. BARR.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

30 So. 563

130 Ala. 570

GUICE v. BARR.

Supreme Court of Alabama

June 14, 1901

Appeal from chancery court, Barbour county; W. L. Parks, Chancellor.

Bill by Lizzie H. Barr against Stella D. Guice to establish a boundary line. From the decree, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

The defendant demurred to the bill, stating in various ways the ground that the facts stated therein did not show that the complainant was entitled to the relief prayed for. This demurrer was overruled. On the final submission of the cause on the pleadings and proof the chancellor decreed that the complainant was entitled to the relief prayed for, and appointed three commissioners "to lay off and establish a line between the lots of complainant and respondent, and near as may be to the original line in dispute shown in the pleadings in this case," etc. The commissioners so appointed made their report, in which they stated that upon the day designated by them they went upon the property accompanied by the agents and representatives of the complainant and respondent, respectively, and, after hearing the evidence and examining the lines between the property they established and fixed a certain line, which is specifically described in their report. To this report of the commissioners the respondent excepted upon the following grounds: "(1) Said report is at variance with the evidence upon which the same is based. (2) Said report is contrary to the evidence submitted to and considered by said commissioners. (3) Said report is too vague and uncertain. (4) Said report fails to determine whether or not the line fixed by the same is different from the line as marked when the bill was filed." Upon the submission of the cause upon the report of the commissioners the objections and exceptions to the report were overruled and held for naught the report was in all things confirmed, and the line as designated and fixed by the commissioners was established by the decree of the court as the correct boundary line between the adjoining lots of the complainant and respondent.

A. H Merrill, for appellant.

S. H. Dent, Jr., for appellee.

TYSON J.

The bill in this cause, as amended, after averring the ownership of the two adjoining lots to be in the complainant and respondent, giving a description of each, alleges that the respondent "has at various times moved the line between said lots of your oratrix and the said Stella D. Guice, and [it] now encroaches on complainant's lot; that, in moving the same, the true boundary line between said lots has become confused and uncertain, and that the same has been moved against the objection of your oratrix; that the line was formerly marked by a division fence, but that the said Stella D. Guice has moved the fence at various times so that the original line has become obliterated, and the same is now in confusion and uncertainty. *** The partition fence having been so frequently moved by said Stella D. Guice in fraud of the rights of your oratrix, the true boundary line has become confused, uncertain, and obliterated, and, so far as your oratrix is able to ascertain, unknown." The purpose of the bill was to have the court establish the true dividing line between the adjacent lands of the complainant and respondent, and, to that end, it prayed the appointment of...