Tucker v. Morris

Decision Date19 May 1921
Docket Number6 Div. 300
CitationTucker v. Morris, 206 Ala. 123, 89 So. 271 (Ala. 1921)
CourtAlabama Supreme Court
PartiesTUCKER et al. v. MORRIS.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County; Hugh A. Locke, Judge.

Bill by Eula R. Morris against Ada May Tucker, as administratrix of the estate of James L. Gilbert, and others, to remove the administration from the probate to the chancery court, for an accounting and the collection of a judgment and another claim against the estate. From a decree overruling demurrers to the bill as amended, respondents appeal. Affirmed.

Burgin & Jenkins, of Birmingham, for appellants.

Arthur L. Brown, of Birmingham, for appellee.

McCLELLAN J.

On October 2, 1916, the complainant, appellee, filed this bill against the appellant and others, as a judgment, and also a contract creditor of James L. Gilbert, deceased. By consent the respondents other than this appellant were eliminated. The original bill sought the removal of the administration of Gilbert's estate from the probate to the chancery court. After much sporadic activity in the cause, on the apparent assumption that the administration had in some way become removed from the probate to the chancery court, the complainant amended her bill (on January 14, 1921), by the addition thereto of paragraphs A to G, inclusive, as well as another prayer for removal of the administration, and for relief by way of discovery and enforced satisfaction of a demand that does not appear to be the same demand as that or as those described in the original bill. Nothing was taken out of the original bill by this amendment. The respondent demurred to the bill as amended on these grounds: A want of equity; departure from the original bill wrought by the introduction of the amendment; that only through conclusions of the pleader is it...

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
3 cases
  • Irwin v. Irwin
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • May 25, 1933
    ...of a special equity. Carter v. Hutchens, 221 Ala. 370, 129 So. 8; Whaley v. Rothschild & Co., 176 Ala. 69, 57 So. 707; Tucker v. Morris, 206 Ala. 123, 89 So. 271; Rensford v. Magnus & Co., 150 Ala. 288, 43 So. Phillips v. Ash's Heirs and Adm'rs, 63 Ala. 414. Having acquired jurisdiction by ......
  • Carter v. Hutchens
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • June 5, 1930
    ... ... equity." Rensford v. Magnus & Co., 150 Ala ... 288, 43 So. 853. To like effect, see, also, Tucker v ... Morris, 206 Ala. 123, 89 So. 271; Whaley v ... Rothschild & Co., 176 Ala. 69, 57 So. 707. The demurrer ... was properly overruled ... ...
  • Johnson v. South
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • May 19, 1921