Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Alropa Corporation v. Pomerance

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided March 25, 1940No. 13050Published

1Concurrence

Bell, Justice.

I concur in the judgment of reversal, but not in all that is said in-the opinion; that is to say, I dissent from the rulings contained in the second division of the decision. It is declared in the Code, § 29-102: “When a grantee accepts a deed and enters thereunder, he will be bound by the covenants contained therein, although the deed has not been signed by him.” As stated in the majority opinion, this section appears to have been adopted in view of the decision in Georgia, Southern Railroad Co. v. Reeves, 64 Ga. 492. It is considered by the majority to have varied the…

2Cases cited45 opinions

  1. Forsyth Manufacturing Co. v. CastlenSupreme Court of Georgia · 1900
  2. Mitchell v. Georgia & Alabama RailwaySupreme Court of Georgia · 1900
  3. Atlanta, Knoxville & Northern Railway Co. v. McKinneySupreme Court of Georgia · 1906
  4. Atlantic Dock Co. v. . LeavittNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
  5. Midland Railway Co. v. FisherIndiana Supreme Court · 1890

40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API