Hamilton v. Williford
Supreme Court of Georgia
Vendor and purchaser. Parol contract of sale. Pleading. Evidence. Practice. Possession. Lien. Title. Estoppel. Before Judge Fish. Dooly superior court.
Read the full summary
Vendor and purchaser. Parol contract of sale. Pleading. Evidence. Practice. Possession. Lien. Title. Estoppel. Before Judge Fish. Dooly superior court. September term, 1891. Complaint by W. O. Hamilton as survivor of the firm of B. B. & W. O. Hamilton, and by Nannie E. Hamilton as sole heir of B. B. Hamilton, against Williford, for the recovery of the south half of lots 16 and 17, and the south three quarters of lots 18 and 19, situated in block 112 in the town of Cordele, Dooly county. The defendant pleaded not guilty. Hpon the trial plaintiffs introduced a deed to the premises in dispute,…
1Opinion of the Court
*211 Judgment reversed.
For the defendant one Culpepper testified that he heard Williford and Clements say they had bought five lots, and they showed him where they were; that after this Clements and witness were going to build a house, and Clements asked witness to let Williford work on it as he was owing him on the land and he wanted him to work it out; that Williford worked on the house to the amount of something over $20, and may have got about a dollar’s worth out of the store, and that was all the pay he got from Culpepper and Clements; that Clements charged witness up with the work…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Grace v. MeansSupreme Court of Georgia · 1907
- Lamar v. PearreSupreme Court of Georgia · 1892
- Rowe v. Sam Weichselbaum Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1908
- Webster v. BlackSupreme Court of Georgia · 1914
- Stewart v. Bank of Social CircleSupreme Court of Georgia · 1897
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.