Tidwell v. Wittmeier
Cases that cite this one
9 later published cases cite this decision. The 8 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Tierce v. APS Co. (Ala. 1979)
- FIRST SOUTHERN FEDERAL SAV. & LOAN v. Britton (Ala. Civ. App. 1977)
- Carroll v. Henderson (Ala. 1915)
- Louisiana Sav. Ass'n v. Trahan (La. Ct. App. 1982)
- Williams v. First Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n of Arlington (4th Cir. 1981)
- Continental Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Fetter (Okla. 1977)
- United States v. Certain Lands in Borough of Brooklyn (2d Cir. 1942)
- Holman v. Hollis (Fla. 1927)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
When this case was here before as reported in 147 Ala. 354, 40 South. 963, we in effect held that the bill contained equity, and we will not recede from that ruling. The bill not only avers a tender, but offeis to pay any balance that may be ascertained to be due upon the mortgage, and prays, in the alternative, that he be permitted to pay what amount may be found due and have the mortgage cancelled.—Whitley & Trimble v. Dunham Lumber Co., 89 Ala. 493, 7 South. 810. The bill as amended does not- aver that no steps had been taken to collect the debt, notwithstanding it' avers that the claim was in the hands of an attorney, and the averment that no attorney’s fee was due was but the legal conclusion of the pleader. Nor does the bill aver a tender of interest from the date of maturity to the date of the alleged tender.
The chancellor properly overruled the motion to dismiss for want, of equity, and properly sustained the -demurrers to the bill as amended; and the decree is affirmed upon the original and cross appeal.
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.