Ledbetter v. Bryant, 5 Div. 756

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
Writing for the CourtBROWN, J.
Citation205 Ala. 77,87 So. 325
Decision Date02 December 1920
Docket Number5 Div. 756
PartiesLEDBETTER v. BRYANT.

87 So. 325

205 Ala. 77

LEDBETTER
v.
BRYANT.

5 Div. 756

Supreme Court of Alabama

December 2, 1920


Appeal from Circuit Court, Tallapoosa County; S.L. Brewer, Judge.

Action by J.S. Bryant against Thomas Ledbetter for trespass to land and for the statutory penalty for destroying trees. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

James W. Strother and J. Percy Oliver, both of Dadeville, for appellant.

Thomas L. Bulger, of Dadeville, for appellee.

BROWN, J.

The plaintiff, appellee here, recovered on the fourth count of the complaint, claiming the statutory penalty under section 6035 of the Code 1907.

The litigated fact in the case is whether the trees in question were cut from the plaintiff's land, and, if so, whether they were cut by the defendant under a bona fide belief that the trees were on his (defendant's) land. The evidence shows that about five years before the trees were cut a dispute arose between the parties over the line between their respective properties, resulting in an attempt to settle the dispute by a survey of the line, and the defendant contends that this resulted in establishing a line by agreement of the parties.

There is much confusion in the evidence as to whether such agreement was reached, and, if so, as to the exact location of the line so agreed upon; whether or not the fence, which was afterwards moved, was placed on the agreed line, and whether or not the fence was moved by the plaintiff or the defendant. Some of the evidence tends to show that some of the stakes set in the attempted survey were moved without the consent of the plaintiff, and that defendant changed the fence, and, in so doing, did not put it on the agreed line--if in fact a line was established by the agreement.

On the whole evidence the case was for the jury, and the charges requested by defendant and refused by the court were refused without error. For like reasons the motion for new trial was properly overruled. Garren v. Fields, 131 Ala. 304, 30 So. 775; Southern Railway Co. v. Kirsch, 150 Ala. 659, 43 So. 796.

Affirmed

ANDERSON, C.J., and SAYRE and GARDNER, JJ., concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 practice notes
  • Berkowitz v. Farrell, 6 Div. 145.
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Appeals
    • April 10, 1923
    ...Ry. Co. v. Kirsch, 150 Ala. 659, 661, 43 So. 796; N., C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v Crosby, 194 Ala. 338, 349, 70 So. 7; Ledbetter v. Bryant, 205 Ala. 77, 87 So. 325; Mutual Loan Soc., Inc., v. Stowe, 15 Ala. App. 293, 73 So. 202; National Life Insurance Co. v. Hedgecoth, 16 Ala. App. 272, 77 S......
  • Ford v. Bradford, 7 Div. 738
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • June 7, 1928
    ...were they cut and removed by defendant under a bona fide belief that the land belonged to him and not to plaintiff. Ledbetter v. Bryant, 205 Ala. 77, 87 So. 325; Ellard v. Goodall, 204 Ala. 645 (7), (8), 87 So. 196. The dispute here was upon the true location of the boundary line between th......
2 cases
  • Berkowitz v. Farrell, 6 Div. 145.
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Appeals
    • April 10, 1923
    ...Ry. Co. v. Kirsch, 150 Ala. 659, 661, 43 So. 796; N., C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v Crosby, 194 Ala. 338, 349, 70 So. 7; Ledbetter v. Bryant, 205 Ala. 77, 87 So. 325; Mutual Loan Soc., Inc., v. Stowe, 15 Ala. App. 293, 73 So. 202; National Life Insurance Co. v. Hedgecoth, 16 Ala. App. 272, 77 S......
  • Ford v. Bradford, 7 Div. 738
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • June 7, 1928
    ...were they cut and removed by defendant under a bona fide belief that the land belonged to him and not to plaintiff. Ledbetter v. Bryant, 205 Ala. 77, 87 So. 325; Ellard v. Goodall, 204 Ala. 645 (7), (8), 87 So. 196. The dispute here was upon the true location of the boundary line between th......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT