## Facts

- Margaret Cox died in Mobile, Alabama, in 1934 and was known to keep substantial cash hidden at home rather than in banks.
- During estate administration, heirs and a special administrator’s attorney searched Cox’s home for hidden currency; the attorney’s stenographer, Irene Hurley, participated in the search.
- The search yielded approximately $11,800 in gold coins, but no large cache of currency was reported found.
- The estate administrators alleged Cox had hidden significant currency in the house and that Hurley stole some or all of it during the search.
- After Cox’s death, Hurley allegedly showed a sudden and unexplained improvement in financial condition inconsistent with her modest income.
- The administrators alleged Hurley transferred Cox’s stolen currency to her uncle, W. C. Lantron, in Texas.
- In April 1935, Lantron purchased two parcels of real property in Mobile; the administrators alleged the purchase money came from Cox’s stolen currency.
- The estate administrators filed an equity action seeking to have the parcels held in trust for Cox’s estate.

## Issues

1. Whether a bill is subject to a general demurrer for “no equity” when its specific prayer mislabels the remedy (resulting trust) but its factual allegations support a constructive trust and include a general prayer for relief.
2. Whether circumstantial evidence was sufficient to support a decree imposing a constructive trust on real property allegedly purchased with stolen estate funds.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Alabama affirmed the trial court’s decree.
- The court held the bill contained equity and the trial court properly overruled the general demurrer.
- The court held the evidence, though circumstantial, was sufficiently cogent to support a finding that Cox’s misappropriated funds were used to purchase the parcels.
- The court upheld the imposition of a constructive trust on the two parcels in favor of Cox’s estate.

## Legal Principles

- When one person wrongfully uses another’s funds to purchase real property, equity may impress the property with a constructive trust in favor of the person whose money was used (or the person’s estate).
- A bill is not demurrable for want of equity merely because it incorrectly labels the equitable remedy in the specific prayer; factual allegations supporting equitable relief, coupled with a general prayer, permit the court to grant the appropriate remedy.
- Constructive trusts may be established through circumstantial evidence if the circumstances are strong enough to support the inference of wrongful acquisition and tracing into specific property.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed a decree declaring a constructive trust over land bought with funds allegedly stolen from a decedent’s hidden cash, and it held that equity jurisdiction was properly invoked despite the bill’s inaccurate request for a resulting trust because the pleaded facts and general prayer supported constructive relief.


Costell v. First Nat’l Bank of Mobile, 274 Ala. 606 (Ala. 1963)