Court Opinion

ID: 9833086
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 22:26:23.921644+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:59.546394
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing.
Appellants assert the facts- in this case have been fully developed, wherefore, the judgment should be reversed and here rendered. Their motion to this effect is well taken, and will be granted.
It is therefore ordered that the order reversing and remanding the cause is set aside, and it is here now ordered that the judgment be reversed and here rendered as follows:
Upon the defendant’s disclaimer the plaintiff, J. M. Bradford, recover an undivided interest of 73 acres in the 200-acre tract sued for; upon their cross-action it is ordered that the defendants W. E. Woods, A. A. Garrett, Tula H. Bennett, Victoria A. Bradford, and W. H. Bradford, executor of the estate, of E. T. Bradford, deceased, by and in the name of said W. H. Bradford, executor of the estate of E. T. Bradford, deceased, and for the use and benefit of the estate of E. T. Bradford, deceased, recover of J. M. Bradford an undivided interest of 127 acres in the 200-acre tract sued for, together with costs of the court below and upon appeal; that W. E. Woods, A. A. Garrett, Tula H. Bennett, and Victoria A. Bradford take nothing by their cross-action against their code-fendant, W. H. Bradford, executor of the estate of E. T. Bradford, deceased, but the denial of any relief upon such cross-action is not to be construed as in anywise impairing the right of said Woods, Garrett, Bennett, and Victoria A. Bradford as creditors of the estate of E. T. Bradford, deceased, or the right to have the said 127 acres of land administered for the benefit of the creditors and devisees of E. T. Bradford, deceased.
Reversed and rendered.