The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-03-07

l Jordan ct al V. Simmons--Decided
 Dec 21. 'o5 (39 So. 670.)
 i 1. Bill of exceptions; signing; exten- sion of time-Counsel entered into an agreement extending the time for the signing of the bill of exceptions, but l the agreement was not made until after 1 the expiration of the time for signing l fixed by the court on the last day or the term and the judge signed the Dill within the time fixed by the agreement of counsel; held. that the judge had no authority to sign 1t at that time' ana I it will not be considered on appeal.
 Appeal from Covington Circuit Court
 Heard before Hon. Wm. H. Sanford, Especial Judge.
 Affirmed. Opinion by Tyson, J.
 Haralson. Simpson and Anderson, JJ., Peacock V. Kirkland ct al-Decided Dec. 2l, O5. (S9 So. 670o | Appeal: delay in filing record' dismissal.-Where judgment was rem dered in the lower court. May 3. 1904. anneal bond filed July 5, 1904, notice or anneaI served Jan. 4, 1905. and the re- l cord not filed in this court until June l 6 19o5. and the delay is due to want of diligence on tho part of appellant l attorneys in furnishing to the clerk or the lower court certain deeds necessary | to he copjed in the bill of excepuons' 1 hold that the was hASN and the appeal will be dismissed. Anpeal from Houston Circuit Court.
 Heard before Hon. Terry Richardson.
 Appeal dismissed. Opinion by Tyson'
 Haralson, Dowdell, Simpson and Dem | son? JJ., concur.
 Shiver V. Hardy ct al.-Declded Deo' @i' | 1905 (39 So. 669) --pIa aintlff 6 title was admitted by the disclaimer or defendants possession and issued Joined on such disclaimer, and the only issue was whether defendants were in pos session. ?. Same; conflicting evidence; afirma tive charge.-In an action in the nature of ejectment involving disputed oouh- diary and possession was the only ls- sue joined. and the evidence as to whether the land in question was m section belonging to plainun or III another section belonging to defendant, was in conflict; held that the general affirmative charge with hypothesis re- auested by plaintiff, was property re- fused. Same; instructions.-In an action in the nature of rejectment where the only issue joined was defendants pos session of the land in controversy, IL
  iury that defendants request that the nIaintifY's right of recovery depended on thf superiority of his title; plaintin was entitled to recover on proof req sonablv satisfying the jury that defena- ants were in possession, irrespective or the strength of his title.
 Appeal from Houston Circuit court.
 Heard before Hon. John T. Hubparo.
 Reversed and remanded. Opinion by Denson, J. TT
 Tyson, Simpson, anu Ahuei sum- '''' Doolev vs. Pinson, ct al. Decided De-
 ccpober al. 1905, (39 So. 664.l
 | Trusts; purchaser of land from another; resulting trusts resting In pa rolf one person advances money lo another for the purchase of land. and to secure the loan takes title in him self and agrees to convey the land to inc borrower upon repayment of the purchase money so advanced, the court of equity will declare the lender a trustee for the borrower and compel a rcconveyance of the land upon pay ment of the loan, although the contract rests entirely in parol
 Same; enforcement of trust; pur- chases for third person,-Where one purchases land with the money Of third nerson and in their name, and took no titIn legal or equitable. in himself ron,nI1inant cannot maintain blli against him to enforce an agreement made by the purchaser to purchase the land for complainant.
 S Same: establishment, character of proof--To ingraft a resulting trust on an absolute conveyance of land, the nroof must be clear, full, satisfactory and convincing. If uncertain, doubtful or unsatisfactory, relief cannot be Evidence; oral declarations.-Ev idence as to what complainant was told bv her husband and agent with respect to q transaction in question is | not admissible.
 5 Trusts: resulting trusts; sufi- ! cienrv of evidence to establish.--The | evidence in this case held insufficient to establish an alleged agreement by the purchasers of the land at Judicial l sale to purchase and hold the lands for | complainant, and to convey them to her upon repayment by her to them of the l purchase money.
 Appeal from Sumter ChancerY Court | Heard before Hon. Thomas H, Smith | Affirmed.
 opinion by Denson. J.; Haralson, Ty- son and Dowdell, JJ.
 l Beale V McKee-Decided December 21 1905. (89 So. 664.)
 1 1. Detinue; burden of proof-Whcre l issue Is joined on a plea of non de-
 tinet in an action to recover personal
 property, the burden of proof is on the | plaintiff
 ?. same; suficiency of evidence oi l title.-Th. plaintiff relies for title tC
 the property on a mortgage executed
 by a third person, there is no evidence