Kirkland v. Gaskins, Paulk & Co.
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Complaint; from Irwin superior court—Judge Gectrgeu December 16, 1916.
1Opinion of the CourtBroyles, P. J.
1. Whenever a speedy sale of personal property is made under the provisions of sections 6068 and 6069 of the Civil Code of 1910, it must affirmatively appear that two days’ notice of the applicant’s intention to apply for an order of sale was duly given, unless the ease falls within one of the exceptions specified in that section. Simmons v. Cooledge, 95 Ga. 50 (2) (21 S. E. 1001). This ease did not fall within any of the exceptions so specified; and it not affirmatively appearing that the two days’ notice was given, the sale was void, and no valid title was obtained by the purchasers thereat.
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Cooper v. SmithSupreme Court of Georgia · 1906
- Wesley v. Battle Bros.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1916
- Simmons v. Cooledge & BrotherSupreme Court of Georgia · 1894
3Cited by6 opinions
- Marshall v. Armour Fertilizer WorksCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1919
- Jackson v. ParksCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1934
- Bright v. Auto Finance & Loan Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1936
- Hodges v. CousinsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1953
- Townsend v. Tattnall BankCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1948
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.