Warwick v. Ocean Pond Fishing Club
Supreme Court of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
Duckworth, Chief Justice.
(After stating the foregoing facts.) Two main questions upon which all exceptions must turn are: (1) Did the evidence relating to the establishment of the dividing line by acquiescence demand the verdict? and (2) was the cross-action of the defendant subject to objection and demurrer that it was not germane to the main action? These two questions will be decided in the order named.
“Acquiescence for seven years, by acts or declarations of adjoining landowners, shall establish a dividing line.” Code, § 85-1602. While the foregoing rule is applicable in processioning…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Osteen v. WynnSupreme Court of Georgia · 1908
- Farr v. WoolfolkSupreme Court of Georgia · 1903
- Tietjen v. DobsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1930
- Bradley v. SheltonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1940
- Veal v. BarberSupreme Court of Georgia · 1944
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- United States v. Roy W. Williams and Carl v. IveyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1971
- Cothran v. BurkSupreme Court of Georgia · 1975
- Bell v. OwensCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1998
- Wright v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1976
- Horn v. PrestonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1961
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.