Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

AUSTIN v. MOEBES.

SAYRE, J.

The complaint and the amendment thereto gave the trial court very distinctly to understand that plaintiff was bringing his suit to recover the statutory penalty, denounced by section 6035 of the Code of 1907, for cutting trees. The trial court cannot now be put in error on the ground that the complaint might have been sustained as a complaint in trespass without regard to the statute.

Plaintiff showed an equity in the land and the trees cut, but failed to show that the legal estate was vested in him. This court has repeatedly held that the legal title in plaintiff is necessary to the maintenance of the action. Shelby Iron Co. v. Ridley, 135 Ala. 513, 33 So. 331, and cases cited.

The court committed no error in giving judgment for the defendant, appellee.

Affirmed.

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

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

AUSTIN v. MOEBES
(Jan 28, 1925)