The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-10-10
sesssss . ses~s0s* +*s$#** HEAD NOTES OF THE DECISIONS
 .... OF THE ALABAMA SUPREME COURT.

tbere was A partnership existing between said person and d third party, ana sas1 |. partnership was conducted unaer .ne name of the party wno enterso ihIo anc contract with the railroad
 TS Estoppel; there must be ceftainty.- Before estoppels can be raised. tnere must be certainty to every intent, ana a not to be taken by argument or enfer- ences from certain circumstances.,
 Same: mstuality.-Mutuality Is an essential ingredient of an est9ppeL V. is not within the general scope of the authority of an agent of corporation to alter vary or enlarge contract made by c corporation under its corporate seal. and. therefore. an .act done or an ad- mission made by the agent Of corpo. ration, who had entered into contract under its corporate seal, having reIer- ence to said contract, can not wosk rl an poration arising under such contract: un- less 1t is shown that said act or admis- sion by said agent. in reference to the contract was duly authorized by the S 6 same; when not shown to esist- Where one addresses communicauoh 70 an agent of 8 corporation, descrieins himself in his repres entauve capac.y, ,,,,,,i, ! cation addresses him simply as an indi- vidual without regard to his representa- tive capacity, such correspondence can not be constryed aci., la.o an rs,stion h Claimed by such person.
 Opinion by Tyson, J.
 KENT ct al. v. DEAN:
 Bill in Equity for Spectnc Periormanne
 of Contract and to enforce Irust.L1Ap
 peal from the Chancery Court or MOT
 1. Equity jurisdiction; specific perform, ance of contract.-If a contract is such as that an action at law will not he 70 cover dsmages ggsci0s f0s .s te enfsree its specific performance or execution. =. Ea,Iity Jurisdictions; sufficiency or prayer.-Where a bill is nled wnicn se,s up a contract, which is insufficient 10 su. thorize its specific performance, but the facts ayerred in the biii show that tne Complainant is entitled to nave Tus. enforced in reference to the t isnas .hs MrIn Sa. fendant held said lands as a trustee ex maieficio. the prayer of such bill. that upon the final hearing the cnanceht1Is ttIs would "enter decree invesunk. ens forcing the specific performance or tne contract as set out in the bill, ana TOT such other. further or different reneI as the facts may war, warrant snr,nr.tsrsI2e or to have a trust declared In favor or tns eomplainant against the defendant as the repository of the title Of comp!ainant Lo the said land, and to require tRe osaen n,, dant to convey the same to the com
 8 Trusts and trustee: a person occupy ing a position of trust can not take au- vantage of it to acqulre nostls ii,.e i s',cr relation to another, by the act or consent of that other, or the act or tnlro per son, or of the law, that he becomes in- terested for him or ,,.sa with nm 'h is nro. ans hibited from acquiring sights in that sup feet, antagonistic to the person wIn whose interest he has become assoeiateu.
 1. Same; when trust Sreaas1 t-.c.s ns land from the same vendor ana enter ln- to possession of the respective tracts, and' subsequently,, by mutual agreement pc tween the purchasers ana %s .Ie ~ tb. court and 1t Is agreed that one or sucn purchasers shall bid in the land ana then make a conveyance to the other pur. bv ths latter; if, upon such sale under the order of the court, the person desfg- mated to bid in the land does so, ana up on demand of the other purchaser retuses pelled to do so by bill in equity to en- force the trust; he holding such land as trustee ex maleficio or eki delicto
 5. Mortgage; bona fide purchaser; mo- tice implied from posseesion.-Where a mortgage is given upon land, portion of which, at the time of the execution of the mortgage, is in the actual possess sion of party other than the mortgagor' and the person so in possession Is claim ing said lands as his own and exercising such acts of ownership over 1t Of which the land Is susceptible, such claim and possession is sumcient to put tne mort tice, and defeats his claim as bona nds purchaser.
 Affirmed.
 Opinion by Haralson. J.