Osborne v. Waddell
| Decision Date | 06 February 1912 |
| Parties | OSBORNE v. WADDELL. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from Montgomery City Court; William H. Thomas, Judge.
Bill by Camilla G. Waddell against W. J. Osborne. From an order overruling demurrers to the bill, defendant appeals. Reversed, rendered, and remanded.
J. Lee Holloway, for appellant.
George Stowers, for appellee.
The complainant filed her original bill against her two minor children for the purpose of selling for division certain real estate alleged to be jointly owned by her and them.
The bill alleged that there had been a sale of the land for taxes in September, 1902, under a decree of the probate court; and that upon the expiration of the two years allowed for redemption a tax deed was executed to Leah Rice, who has paid all subsequent taxes, and who now offers to release her interest to complainant and respondents for the sum of $80. This allegation was made with a view to the apportionment of this incumbrance to the several shares of the joint owners.
An amendment was filed, as follows:
This Osborne is, by the amendment, made a party defendant to the bill, with the prayer that the court "adjudicate the interest of said Osborne in said property, and to decree that he only has a lien on said property for the purchase price paid at said tax sale, costs, and subsequent taxes and interest thereon, and complainant and said infants allowed to redeem said property." It is somewhat difficult to grasp the theory underlying this amendment; but, whatever the theory may be, the amended bill is subject to numerous and vital objections by Osborne. If it be regarded as a bill to quiet title, it is multifarious, as was held in the recent case of Brown v. Feagin, 57 So. 20, to say nothing of other deficiencies.
On the other hand, if it is a bill to enforce the right of redemption from a purchaser at tax sale, it is wholly without equity, so far as Osborne is...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Watson v. Baker
...The case of Bracely v. Noble, 201 Ala. 74, 77 So. 368, was for redemption from municipal tax sale. And in the case of Osborne v. Waddell, 176 Ala. 232, 57 So. 698, the bill was for the purpose of selling for certain real estate alleged to be jointly owned, and the observation made that, if ......
-
Bracely v. Noble
... ... municipal taxes. When so understood, Bains' Case is seen ... not to be in conflict with the decision in Osborne v ... Waddell, 176 Ala. 232, 57 So. 698, as to the ... jurisdiction of the chancery court to enforce the right of ... redemption of lands from ... ...
-
Dodson v. Protective Life Ins. Co.
...of Mrs. Dodson is not within the statute of frauds, although an agreement to release land from a mortgage is within it. Osborne v. Waddell, 176 Ala. 232, 57 So. 698; Barker v. Bell, 37 Ala. 354, 359; McCoy Wynn, 215 Ala. 172, 110 So. 129. As is also a release of the equity of redemption in ......
-
Standard Contractors Supply Co. v. Scotch
...119 So. 610, and Sandlin v. Anders, 210 Ala. 396, 98 So. 299; Watson v. Baker, 228 Ala. 652, 154 So. 788. It was observed also in Osborne v. Waddell, supra, that if it treated as an effort to redeem from this third person under the tax sale it was without equity as to him because complainan......