From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Phillips v. Norris

Supreme Court of Alabama
Apr 9, 1931
133 So. 697 (Ala. 1931)

Opinion

6 Div. 656.

April 9, 1931.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County; Wm. M. Walker, Judge.

Coleman D. Shepherd, of Jasper, for appellants.

An option to sell and convey a homestead, even though executed and separately acknowledged by the wife, is void and unenforceable against both the wife and husband who executed it. Moses v. McClain, 82 Ala. 370, 2 So. 741; Lyon v. Hardin, 129 Ala. 643, 29 So. 777; Clark v. Bird, 158 Ala. 278, 48 So. 359, 132 Am. St. Rep. 25; McGuire v. Van Pelt, 55 Ala. 345; Pettus v. McKinney, 56 Ala. 41; Snedecor v. Freeman, 71 Ala. 140; McClendon v. Equitable Mortgage Co., 122 Ala. 384, 25 So. 30; Marks v. Wilson, 115 Ala. 561, 22 So. 134; De Graffenried v. Clark, 75 Ala. 425.

Davis Curtis, of Jasper, for appellee.

The amount of the consideration for the tract and the uses to which it was put and adapted took away from the tract its homestead character, and the option is enforceable. Garrett v. Jones, 95 Ala. 100, 10 So. 702; Bell v. Anniston Hardware Co., 114 Ala. 341, 21 So. 414; Turner v. Turner, 107 Ala. 465, 18 So. 210, 54 Am. St. Rep. 110; Laughlin v. Wright, 63 Cal. 113; Masberg v. Granville, 201 Ala. 5, 75 So. 154; Blackburn v. McLaughlin, 202 Ala. 434, 80 So. 818; Eastis v. Beasley, 214 Ala. 651, 108 So. 763.


This appeal is from a decree overruling the defendants' demurrer to the bill. The point taken is that the allegations of the bill show that the property involved is the defendants' homestead.

The facts alleged show that the primary adaption of the buildings on the property is to business purposes, and that its primary use is for conducting a mercantile business; that the use of the rooms at the back of the main building was a mere incident to the business use of the property. Garrett Sons v. Jones, 95 Ala. 96, 10 So. 702; Moseley v. Neville, 221 Ala. 429, 129 So. 12; Bell v. Anniston Hdwe. Co., 114 Ala. 341, 21 So. 414; Turner v. Turner, 107 Ala. 465, 18 So. 210, 54 Am. St. Rep. 110.

The demurrers to the bill were not well taken and were properly overruled.

Affirmed.

ANDERSON, C. J., and SAYRE and THOMAS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Phillips v. Norris

Supreme Court of Alabama
Apr 9, 1931
133 So. 697 (Ala. 1931)
Case details for

Phillips v. Norris

Case Details

Full title:PHILLIPS et al. v. NORRIS

Court:Supreme Court of Alabama

Date published: Apr 9, 1931

Citations

133 So. 697 (Ala. 1931)
133 So. 697

Citing Cases

White v. Williams

Accordingly, we so treat the matter here. What effect, if any, that might have upon the case at bar, we do…