Thompson v. Mawhinney

Citations

• 17 Ala. 362

Syllabus

<p>1. The declarations of a party in possession of property, explanatory of the contract under which lie acquired it, do not constitute a part of the res gestes, and are consequently inadmissible as evidence for him.</p> <p>2. ,A contract with the owner by which the occupant agrees to cultivate .. and divide with him equally the products of his farm, creates between them a tenancy in common in the products — one of the .essential attributes of which is unity of possession.</p> <p>3. Mere authority given by one tenant in common to another to sell the joint property does not divest the former of the right to its possession, nor exempt it from levy and sale under execution against him.</p>