Hood v. Holligan, 6 Div. 558.

• Decision Date: 17 January 1935
• Docket Number: 6 Div. 558.
• Citation: 158 So. 759,229 Ala. 539
• Parties: HOOD v. HOLLIGAN et al.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

158 So. 759

229 Ala. 539

HOOD v. HOLLIGAN et al.

6 Div. 558.

Supreme Court of Alabama

January 17, 1935

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County; Wm. M. Walker, Judge.

Bill to quiet title by Bruce A. Hood against Narcissus Holligan (or Holihan) and others, and cross-bill by defendants. From a decree overruling a demurrer to the cross-bill, complainant appeals.

Affirmed.

Smyer Smyer & Bainbridge, of Birmingham, for appellant.

Harsh Harsh & Hare, of Birmingham, for appellees.

BROWN Justice.

The original bill was filed by the appellant, Bruce A. Hood under the statute to quiet the title to the northwest quarter of the northwest quarter of section 10, township 16, range 3 west, Jefferson county, not including the mineral rights.

The bill avers that the complainant is in the peaceable possession of the property; that the appellees, Narcissus Holligan (also known as Holihan), a non compos mentis, J. E. Brewer, as guardian of said non compos mentis, and Earnest Ragland, are claiming some right, title, or interest in said land, and calls on them to set forth and avow their right, title, or claim thereto.

The defendants filed an answer asserting that the appellee Narcissus Holihan is the owner of said property, holding a fee-simple title thereto; that the said Earnest Ragland is her tenant; that said land was patented to Patrick Holihan, the deceased husband of the said Narcissus Holihan, by the United States; that said Patrick Holihan, by his last will, bequeathed to his widow, Narcissus, a fee-simple title to one half of said land, with a life estate in the other half, and remainder over to his only child, "Thomas, alias Tomey Holihan"; that subsequent to the death of said Patrick Holihan, the said only child deeded his interest to said Narcissus, and she has been in the open, notorious, adverse, and exclusive possession thereof for more than twenty years before the filing of the original bill.

The answer, which is prayed to be taken and considered as a cross-bill, further avers " that at some time during the year 1930 or 1931, one James A. Brewer took advantage of the mental condition and age of said respondent, Narcissus Holihan, and of his relation to her, viz.: that of grandson, and got her to sign a paper purporting to deed said land to the said James A. Brewer, and said respondent through her guardian is informed and believes and therefore charges that said James A. Brewer executed some sort of deed or instrument in writing purporting to convey said land to said complainant, Bruce A. Hood. Respondents and cross complainants further aver that at the time of the purported execution and delivery of said paper purporting to deed said land to said James A. Brewer, said Narcissus Holihan was non compos mentis, and said James A. Brewer had knowledge of her said condition at said time." The answer and cross-bill further aver that there was no consideration for the execution and delivery of said paper purporting to convey said land to said James A. Brewer. The defendant Narcissus Holihan does not, in her cross-bill, offer to do equity. (Italics supplied.)

The complainant (respondent to the...