Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
Mail Concepts, Inc. v. Foote & Davies, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided July 16, 1991No. A91A0166Published
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partAndrews, Judge
While I fully concur with Divisions 1 and 2,1 respectfully dissent as to Division 3, as I do not believe Cowart v. Singletary, 140 Ga. 435 (79 SE 196) (1913) and Decatur North Assoc. v. Builders Glass, 180 Ga. App. 862 (350 SE2d 795) (1986) support the conclusions drawn from them, but do believe that the non-assignment clause here precluded assignment.
Cowart originated as an equitable action seeking, among other equitable relief, to require Grimsley, the holder of legal title to real estate by virtue of a warranty deed from Holmes, to execute a deed to Singletary, the holder of equitable…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Cowart v. SingletarySupreme Court of Georgia · 1913
- Mingledorff's, Inc. v. HicksCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1974
- Decatur North Associates, Ltd. v. Builders Glass, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1986
- Perkins v. RhodesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1941
- Rucker v. CorbinCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1988