Murphy v. Green
| Decision Date | 20 December 1900 |
| Citation | 128 Ala. 486,30 So. 643 |
| Parties | MURPHY v. GREEN. [1] |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from chancery court, Conecuh county; W.L. Parks, Chancellor.
Bill by J. J. Green against W. H. Murphy to enjoin an action of ejectment and to quiet title. Decree for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Reversed.
For former opinions, see 22 So. 112, 29 So. 149.
The bill averred and showed that appellee claimed under a deed executed by Mrs. Travis on July 15, 1892, without being joined therein by her husband; that complainant went into possession under said deed, claiming ownership; and that in 1895 another deed was executed to him by said grantor and her husband to cure the defects in the former deed. Respondent claimed title under sheriff's deed under an execution sale on a judgment recovered by him against Mrs. Travis, said sale having taken place on the 12th day of August, 1895.
J. F Jones and J. M. Chilton, for appellant.
Stallworth & Burnett, G. R. Farnham, and Lomax, Crum & Weil, for appellee.
The purpose of the bill filed by the complainant, J. J. Green who is the appellee here, was to enjoin an action of ejectment commenced by the appellant, Murphy, in the circuit court of Conecuh county, for the recovery of certain lands described in the bill, and to remove the cloud from the alleged title of the complainant to said lands. It is alleged in the second paragraph of the bill "that he [complainant] purchased and paid for said lands in good faith, and was put into the possession thereof immediately after he made such purchase, and has remained in the possession ever since that time until the present, using and claiming the same as his own openly and notoriously; and orator further alleges that the consideration expressed in said deed is the true amount he paid for said land, and the same was at the time of said purchase the fair market value thereof." It is further shown by the bill that the respondent, Murphy, claims title under a sheriff's deed under an execution sale on a judgment recovered by said respondent against Mary E. Travis, complainant's grantor. The special prayer of the bill is for an injunction against said action of ejectment and for a cancellation of said sheriff's deed, and also that complainant "may be confirmed and established in his title to said lands." The answer of the respondent, Murphy, expressly denies the alleged bona fides of the transaction between the grantor Mary E. Travis, and the complainant, J. J. Green, in the sale and purchase of said land, and avers that the same was fraudulent, and done with the purpose and intent to hinder, delay, and defraud the creditors of said Mary E. Travis, and especially the said respondent, Murphy, and also avers that the alleged consideration paid for said land was simulated and fictitious, and, in fact, that no consideration was paid. Under the averments in the bill and the denials in the answer, the bona fides of the transaction, as to the sale and purchase of the lands, between the complainant and the said Mary E. Travis, became a material and vital issue in the case, dispensing with any necessity on the part of the respondent, Murphy, of raising and presenting the same by a cross bill, and the assignment of error on the decree, rendered on the facts, properly presents for review and consideration the correctness of the chancellor's finding upon the evidence. It is manifest, under the issues presented by the pleading, if the transaction of the sale of said land by Mrs. Travis to the complainant was the result of a purpose and intent on the part of Mrs. Travis to defraud her creditors, and wanting in the bona fides alleged in the bill, the bill would be without equity; and we think there can be no doubt, under the bill as framed and the denials and averments in the answer, that the burden of proof as to the alleged bona fides of the transaction of sale rests upon the complainant.
The facts show that the complainant, Green, is a brother of his grantor, Mary E. Travis, and that at the time of the alleged sale of the lands, and for some time previous thereto, he was and had been in the employment of his said sister in the lumber-milling business, and resided with her as a member of her family. The recited consideration of the deed of July 15 1892, from Mary E. Travis to Joel J. Green, was $1,787.50, cash in hand paid. At the date of the execution of this deed, Mary E. Travis was indebted to the respondent, Murphy, in the sum of $550 on a contract made in September, 1891. Besides this, she was also indebted to a number of other parties, merchants in Mobile and Atlanta, from whom she had been buying supplies for a country store run in connection with the lumber-milling business which she had been carrying on. These creditors were pressing their claims, and if she were not at that time in failing circumstances she was very greatly embarrassed financially. The complainant, Green, her brother, knew of this indebtedness. Green was a man of no property, but it is claimed that he paid the...
To continue reading
Request your trial