Hamilton v. Robinson
| Decision Date | 17 December 1914 |
| Docket Number | 903 |
| Citation | 190 Ala. 549,67 So. 434 |
| Parties | HAMILTON et al. v. ROBINSON. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from Chancery Court, Jefferson County; A.H. Benners Chancellor.
Suit by Ellie H. Robinson against W.C. Hamilton and others. Decree for plaintiff, and defendants appeal. Affirmed.
Hamill & Savage, of Birmingham, for appellants.
M.L Ward and W.H. Smith, both of Birmingham, for appellee.
DE GRAFFENRIED, J.
The bill of complaint in this case shows the following: That on the 27th day of November, 1911, the complainant, Ellie H Robinson, sold to W.C. Hamilton certain real estate in consideration of $10 cash and the assumption by Hamilton of an indebtedness of $14,500 to Rosa B. Steiner secured by mortgage on the property and also an indebtedness of $3,150 to Fidelity Mortgage & Bond Company secured by mortgage on said property, the latter mortgage being second to said Steiner mortgage; that on the 2d day of April, 1913, the said Hamilton conveyed the said property to John U. Poyntz, who when he purchased, assumed the payment of the above-described indebtedness to Rosa B. Steiner and had notice of the above mortgage indebtedness due said Fidelity Mortgage & Bond Company; that W.C. Hamilton made default in the payment of said bond company mortgage indebtedness; that thereupon complainant was sued by said bond company, and a judgment was rendered in favor of said bond company against complainant for the same; and that complainant has been forced to pay the same. The bill prays that complainant be subrogated to the rights of the Fidelity Mortgage & Bond Company under the mortgage which was executed by complainant to said company; that the amount due by W.C. Hamilton upon said mortgage indebtedness to said bond company, and which he failed to pay, be ascertained; that the lands be sold for the satisfaction of said indebtedness; and that said lands be sold subject to the indebtedness due the said Rosa B. Steiner. The bill alleges that at least a part of the indebtedness to Rosa B. Steiner has been paid, prays that the balance remaining unpaid be ascertained, and that complainant be given the right to redeem said property from said mortgage. The bill fails to show whether all of the indebtedness to Rosa B. Steiner was due at the time the bill was filed.
2. If the allegations of the bill are true, then the complainant is entitled to be subrogated to all of the rights of the bond company upon...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brownson v. Hannah
... ... payment of mortgage, grantee becomes principal debtor, ... primarily liable for debt, and mortgagor becomes ... surety'--citing Hamilton v. Robinson, 190 Ala ... 549, 67 So. 434 ... In ... Smith v. Davis, 67 Colo. 128, 186 P. 519, it is said: ... 'A ... ...
-
A.M. Robinson Co. v. Anniston Land Co.
...v. Curry, 62 Ala. 404; White's Adm'r v. Life Association of America, 63 Ala. 419, 35 Am.Rep. 45; Gresham v. Ware, 79 Ala. 192; Hamilton v. Robinson, supra. This is rested upon presumption that, in the absence of proof to the contrary, one intends what will best accord with his rightful inte......
-
Duke v. Kilpatrick
... ... Johnson assumed and agreed to pay the mortgage indebtedness, ... he became, as between the parties, primarily liable for the ... same. Hamilton v. Robinson, 190 Ala. 549, 67 So ... 434; Faulk v. Calloway, 123 Ala. 325, 26 So. 504, ... 506; People's Bank v. Jordan, 200 Ala. 500, 76 ... So ... ...
- Adams v. Walsh