Davidson v. Adams
Davidson v. Adams
Opinion of the Court
-The case made by the bill, which is filed by J. R. Adams against H. C. Davidson, is in substance this: The register of the chancery court of' Montgomery has or will have in his custody the sum of’ $2720 proceeds of the sale of certain land for partition made under a decree rendered on a bill which alleged' that Moses Brothers owned a one-half interest in said land and J. R. Adams and H. C. Davidson — -the complainant and respondent in the present bill — owned the-other undivided half interest as partners under the firm-name of J. R. Adams & Co. The averments of that bill, which was filed and prosecuted by Cheney, as trustee of
We are unable to refer the case thus presented to any recognized head of equity jurisdiction. It clearly does not involve the settlement of a partnership; the bill avers that no partnership with reference to the land ever existed between complainant and defendant, and further that the partnership which did at one time exist betAveen them had been fully settled and dissolved. It does not involve the partition of land between the parties nor the division of the proceeds of- land, since the bill shows that they never held any land in common and that they have no joint or common interest in the fund arising from the sale of land. It does not involve any equitable title; the bill alleges in the clearest manner that complainant’s title was a perfect legal one. No accident, fraud or mistake is averred, made or committéd by either party to the suit; and if reliance could be had upon the mistake of Cheney, a stranger to this action, in stating the interests of Adams and Davidson, any injury which has resulted therefrom to complainant is chargeable to his own laches and negligence, from which he is not en
Our conclusion is, that the motion to dismiss the bill for Avant of equity should have been sustained. The decree of the city court must, therefore, be reversed; and a decree Avill be here entered sustaining said motion and dismissing the bill for the want of equity.
Reversed and rendered.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.