| Ala. | Dec 15, 1888
In Smith v. Cockrell, 66 Ala. 64" court="Ala." date_filed="1880-12-15" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/smiths-v-cockrell-6510705?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="6510705">66 Ala. 64, it was held that a purchaser of land at a sheriff’s sale, under execution against a debtor who has made a fraudulent conveyance of the legal title to his vendee, had a plain and adequate remedy at law by action of ejectment, and, for this reason, he can not, before recovery of possession, file a bill against the purchaser to cancel the fraudulent deed as a cloud on his title. I dissented from the conclusion reached by the majority of the court in that case, and have had no reason to change my opinion as then expressed, in support of which I might add other authorities if Lwere disposed to re-open the discussion. —Sands v. Hildreth, 14 John. Ch. 493; Hildreth
On the authority of these cases, the bill in this case was properly dismissed, as being without equity.
Affirmed.