Milton Mitchell v. Leviene S. Curry

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

REL: 1/07/2011 Notice: T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o formal r e v i s i o n b e f o r e p u b l i c a t i o n i n t h e advance s h e e t s o f Southern R e p o r t e r . R e a d e r s a r e r e q u e s t e d t o n o t i f y t h e R e p o r t e r o f D e c i s i o n s , Alabama A p p e l l a t e C o u r t s , 300 D e x t e r A v e n u e , M o n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a 3 6 1 0 4 - 3 7 4 1 ((334) 2 2 9 - 0 6 4 9 ) , o f a n y t y p o g r a p h i c a l o r o t h e r e r r o r s , i n o r d e r t h a t c o r r e c t i o n s may b e made b e f o r e t h e o p i n i o n i s p r i n t e d i n Southern R e p o r t e r . ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OCTOBER TERM, 2010-2011 2090665 Milton Mitchell v. Leviene S. Curry Appeal from Mobile C i r c u i t (CV-08-1091.51) Court On A p p l i c a t i o n f o r R e h e a r i n g THOMAS, J u d g e . APPLICATION OVERRULED. Thompson, P.J., and Pittman Moore, J . , d i s s e n t s , w i t h and Bryan, J J . , concur. writing. 2090665 MOORE, J u d g e , dissenting. I dissent to the denial of the a p p l i c a t i o n f o r rehearing b e c a u s e I b e l i e v e t h a t t h e a p p l i c a t i o n r a i s e s an a r g u m e n t t h a t s h o u l d be a d d r e s s e d b y m o d i f y i n g on original t h i s court's opinion submission. In h i s a p p l i c a t i o n f o r a r e h e a r i n g , that this property court erred by holding "by way o f a t a x d e e d . " 2090665, S e p t e m b e r 10, 2010] App. of 2010). Levine Curry that he See M i t c h e l l v . C u r r y , So. 3d , b y way o f a t a x - s a l e the [Ms. (Ala. C i v . b y way o f a t a x d e e d b u t t h a t , possession argues possessed C u r r y s t a t e s t h a t he d i d n o t come i n t o the property came i n t o released possession instead, certificate. he He c o r r e c t l y p o i n t s o u t t h a t § 4 0 - 1 0 - 7 4 , A l a . Code 1975, p r o v i d e s that he receipt was entitled to possession of the tax-sale of the property certificate. Curry b e c a u s e he h e l d a v a l i d t a x - s a l e c e r t i f i c a t e , was l a w f u l d e s p i t e this court's conclusion posits upon that, h i s possession t h a t t h e t a x deed was v o i d . I opinion note, however, issued that, as p o i n t e d out i n t h i s court's on o r i g i n a l submission i n Mitchell, supra, " f o r m e r § 3 1 1 9 [ , an i d e n t i c a l l y w o r d e d p r e d e c e s s o r s t a t u t e t o 2 2090665 § 40-10-131, Ala. ['from l i a b i l i t y Code to 1975,] account did exempt rents, for not issues, "upon r e d e m p t i o n " ' ] when a t a x s a l e was (1926)) evidence (emphasis indicated that whether Curry obtained stated in this court's way of added). a tax-sale the tax opinion on certificate, the by 592, way of argued profits So. 108 3d So. case, void. original as and present s a l e was possession application for rehearing, this In purchaser void," ( q u o t i n g A b a t e s v. T i m b e s , 214 A l a . 591, 535 a at 534, the Therefore, a tax deed, as s u b m i s s i o n , or by by Curry in his i s i r r e l e v a n t to the d i s p o s i t i o n of appeal. A l t h o u g h I u l t i m a t e l y c o n c l u d e t h a t C u r r y ' s argument i s incorrect, I believe that this court's o r i g i n a l s u b m i s s i o n s h o u l d be m o d i f i e d 3 opinion released to c l a r i f y that on issue.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.