Reeves v. Reeves

Decision Date20 April 1922
Docket Number4 Div. 983.
CitationReeves v. Reeves, 207 Ala. 362, 92 So. 551 (Ala. 1922)
PartiesREEVES v. REEVES.
CourtAlabama Supreme Court

Appeal from Circuit Court, Coffee County; A. B. Foster, Judge.

Action by Lillie Reeves against Mattie Reeves and another for the recovery of property in specie. Judgment for the plaintiff and the defendant, Mattie Reeves, appeals. Transferred from Court of Appeals under section 6, Acts 1911, p. 449. Reversed and remanded.

W. W Sanders, of Elba, for appellant.

J. M Loflin, of Elba, for appellee.

SAYRE J.

Omitting mention of items of property, judgment as to which is not now contested, appellee, claiming in the right of her husband deceased, brought this statutory action of detinue against appellant to recover 100 bushels of corn, 250 bales of hay, one cow and her calf.

Corn and hay: Defendant was the mother of the deceased husband of plaintiff. Deceased, a young man of 26 years, had lived on the land with his mother from birth. The land belonged to his mother. It was shown without dispute that corn and hay-except about 30 bushels of the corn which deceased had raised on another place-was produced by the joint efforts of deceased and his mother, and was stored in her barn. There had been no contract between them in respect of the ownership or division of the crops raised by their joint efforts; deceased had continued to work on the farm in the same general way ever since he was big enough to work. Our judgment is that the hay and so much of the corn as was raised by the joint efforts of deceased and his mother was owned by them-plaintiff in the right of her deceased husband-as tenants in common. The 30 bushels of corn belonged, of course, to plaintiff; but her husband had commingled it with the other corn in the...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 cases
  • Poole v. Griffith
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • March 24, 1927
    ...by joint effort, and no division had been made between them, a joint ownership or tenancy in common would have been shown. Reeves v. Reeves, 207 Ala. 362, 92 So. 551; Mullins v. Baker, 193 Ala. 594, 69 So. Thompson v. Mawhinney & Smith, 17 Ala. 362, 52 Am.Dec. 176. However, the record is si......
  • Vest v. Bond Bros.
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • October 8, 1931
    ...but of a severable part in an admixture to which the party not at fault is entitled to an exclusive possession. The case of Reeves v. Reeves, 207 Ala. 362, 92 So. 551, where the major portion of the property involved was held the usual relation of tenants in common, and Smith v. Rice, 56 Al......
  • Stewart v. Weaver
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • May 10, 1956
    ...had failed to make repairs. This evidence was inadmissible as hearsay. See Napier v. Elliott, 177 Ala. 113, 58 So. 435; Reeves v. Reeves, 1922, 207 Ala. 362, 92 So. 551. The refused evidence which is the basis of assignment of error 12 (amount of rent grantor was to receive) was embraced in......
  • Lyons v. Porter
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Civil Appeals
    • November 16, 1988
    ...tenant in common may not bring an action of detinue or trover against another tenant in common to recover the property. Reeves v. Reeves, 207 Ala. 362, 92 So. 551 (1922); Smith & Co. v. Rice, 56 Ala. 417, 425 (1876). We find no error here. The last argument of the plaintiff concerns whether......
  • Get Started for Free