Hall v. Hall

• Decision Date: 13 April 1911
• Citation: 55 So. 146,171 Ala. 618
• Parties: HALL ET AL. v. HALL ET AL.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

55 So. 146

171 Ala. 618

HALL ET AL. v. HALL ET AL.

Supreme Court of Alabama

April 13, 1911

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

Bill by Florence Hall and others against H. B. Hall and others to quiet title to land. From a decree for complainants respondents appeal. Affirmed.

William Vaughan, for appellants.

W. K Terry, for appellees.

MAYFIELD J.

The bill in this case is to quiet or settle title and determine claims to land. The complainants are the widow and children and heirs, respectively, of a deceased husband and father against other children and heirs of the same father. The bill alleges that the land in question was the homestead of the deceased, at his death; that it was all the land or realty that he owned at his death, and was therefore the homestead of the complainants, who were his wife and minor children at his death; that the respondents were the adult children, and therefore heirs of the decedent; and that they claim title to or interest in such land as the heirs of decedent.

The bill was answered, and the answer admitted all the material allegations of the bill, but denied that complainants were vested with the fee to the land by virtue of the statutes as to exemptions and descent, claiming that complainants took only a homestead right during the life of the widow and the minority of the children, with remainder to the children--complainants and respondents--as tenants in common. Had the land in question been other than the homestead of the decedent at the time of his death, or had he possessed other lands in excess of the homestead right--therefore making an administration or other appropriate proceeding necessary to determine the status of the land as a homestead, or to mark its boundaries or fix its limits as to amount or value--the contention of appellants (respondents below) would be correct; but, as the bill avers and the answer admits, and as the proof shows, such was not the fact.

Under the rulings of this court the title--fee simple, or all the title the decedent had--to the land in question, on the death of the decedent, vested eo instante in complainants, by virtue of the statutes, without any proceedings of any kind to set apart the same as a homestead. As was said in the case of Tartt v. Negus, 127 Ala. 307, 28 So. 715 "The statute authorizes proceedings in the probate court for setting apart the homestead, and they may be...