foundations rule in Alabama

2008While the relation of parent and child is per se confidential, yet in view of the presumption, recognized in this state and abundantly supported by authorities elsewhere, that the parent is the dominant spirit, the burden of proof is not shifted upon the mere proof of relationship and activity, on the part of the beneficiary child, in the preparation of the will....’ “(Emphasis added.) See, also, Bain v. Bain, 150 Ala. 453 , 43 So. 562 (1907) (an action to set aside conveyances from a father to the wife of one of his sons and his son’s children).” 631 So.2d at 993-94 . 5 In the present case, t

2008While the relation of parent and child is per se confidential, yet in view of the presumption, recognized in this state and abundantly supported by authorities elsewhere, that the parent is the dominant spirit, the burden of proof is not shifted upon the mere proof of relationship and activity, on the part of the beneficiary child, in the preparation of the will....’ “(Emphasis added.) See, also, Bain v. Bain, 150 Ala. 453 , 43 So. 562 (1907) (an action to set aside conveyances from a father to the wife of one of his sons and his son’s children).” 631 So.2d at 993-94 . 5 In the present case, t

2008While the relation of parent and child is per se confidential, yet in view of the presumption, recognized in this state and abundantly supported by authorities elsewhere, that the parent is the dominant spirit, the burden of proof is not shifted upon the mere proof of relationship and activity, on the part of the beneficiary child, in the preparation of the will....’ “(Emphasis added.) See, also, Bain v. Bain, 150 Ala. 453 , 43 So. 562 (1907) (an action to set aside conveyances from a father to the wife of one of his sons and his son’s children).” 631 So.2d at 993-94 . 5 In the present case, t

1988In the case of Darden v. Meadows, 259 Ala. 676 , 68 So.2d 709 (1953), the Court held that one such circumstance is the intervening death of a witness: “The principal foundations of the doctrine of laches are acquiescence and lapse of time.

1988In the case of Darden v. Meadows, 259 Ala. 676 , 68 So.2d 709 (1953), the Court held that one such circumstance is the intervening death of a witness: “The principal foundations of the doctrine of laches are acquiescence and lapse of time.

1953Johnson v. Sandlin, 209 Ala. 430 , 96 So. 223 . * * * This rule is especially salutary in cases like this one where death has sealed the lips of the party against whom relief is sought.” The principal foundations of the doctrine of laches are acquiescence and lapse of time.

1953Johnson v. Sandlin, 209 Ala. 430 , 96 So. 223 . * * * This rule is especially salutary in cases like this one where death has sealed the lips of the party against whom relief is sought.” The principal foundations of the doctrine of laches are acquiescence and lapse of time.

1915While the relation of parent and child is per se confidential, yet in view of the presumption, recognized in this state and abundantly supported by authorities elsewhere, that the parent is the dominant spirit, the burden, of proof is not shifted upon the mere proof of relationship and activity, on the part of the beneficiary child, in the preparation of the will, and to such cases the general rule as stated in Bancroft v. Otis, 91 Ala. 279 , 8 South. 286 , 24 Am.