116 So. 906 | Ala. | 1928
The authority of Blackmen v. Engram,
We are in accord with the Court of Appeals that the statute (section 8894, Code of 1923) quoted in the opinion of that court was not intended to "violate fundamental rights of property," and the language of this court in *607 the Engram Case, supra, is not therefore to be construed as indicating to the contrary and restricting superiority of mortgages to those executed as security for the purchase money. The two cases are readily differentiated.
The opinion of the Court of Appeals is correct, and the petition will be denied.
Writ denied.
ANDERSON, C. J., and SAYRE and BOULDIN, JJ., concur.