Court Opinion

ID: 9934595
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-09 18:54:19.44974+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:25:53.149069
License: Public Domain

Ms. Sashinger contends that Wynn's title to the disputed property was divested out *Page 1068 
of him and into her by the 1981 court judgment in which she was awarded certain property, purportedly including the strip in dispute. There is nothing in the record that shows that Wynn was a party to the 1981 proceeding. Ms. Sashinger further contends that even if Wynn would have been an indispensable party to the 1981 proceeding, but was not made a party, the court proceeding divested him of any interest in the disputed strip of land. This is not correct. See Dominey v. Mathison,292 Ala. 293, 293 So.2d 472 (1974).