Johnson v. Palmour
Supreme Court of Georgia
Practice. Claim. Burden of proof. Evidence. Verdict. Before Judge Wellborn. Hall superior court. July term, 1890. After the .decision in this case as reported in 84 Ga. 91, another trial was had, resulting in a verdict finding the property subject. The claimant moved for a new trial on the grounds indicated in the head-notes, and her motion was overruled. The nature of the evidence may be seen by reference to the former report.
Read the full summary
Practice. Claim. Burden of proof. Evidence. Verdict. Before Judge Wellborn. Hall superior court. July term, 1890. After the .decision in this case as reported in 84 Ga. 91, another trial was had, resulting in a verdict finding the property subject. The claimant moved for a new trial on the grounds indicated in the head-notes, and her motion was overruled. The nature of the evidence may be seen by reference to the former report. There was testimony for the plaintiffs that the defendant in execution was very much in debt, was insolvent, and made the deed to the claimant (his sister) for the…
1Opinion of the Court
Lumpkin, Justice.
1. In order to authorize the claimant to demand the right to open and conclude, she should have admitted facts amounting to aprima facie case for the plaintiff m fi.fa. This she did not offer to do. She could not ad*246mit that defendant in fi. fa. was in possession of the property, because, in fact, she herself was in possession of a portion of it; and, therefore, even had she attempted to make this admission, simply to obtain the right to open and conclude, the court should not have allowed it for this purpose. See Royce & Co. et al. v. Gazan, 76 Ga. 79. In view of the facts…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Royce & Co. v. GazanSupreme Court of Georgia · 1885
3Cited by2 opinions
- Gregory v. HarrellSupreme Court of Georgia · 1891
- Miller v. Clermont Banking Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1935