Federal Land Bank v. Bank of Lenox
Supreme Court of Georgia
1DissentDuckworth, Justice
The transactions by which Medford reacquired the land here involved were simultaneous, and hence it can not be correctly said that any one conveyance preceded the other in point of time. Therefore Medford did not reacquire title to the fee, but only an equity subject to the Federal Land Bank deed securing the purchase-money and the excess loaned to him. Given the most liberal interpretation that its language will permit, Code § 29-111 is still limited in its application to the actual title, no more and no less, subsequently acquired. That section was never intended to refer to the fee-simple…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Van Renesselaer v. KearneySupreme Court of the United States · 1851
- Citizens Bank v. TaylorSupreme Court of Georgia · 1923
- Isler v. GriffinSupreme Court of Georgia · 1910
- White & Corbitt v. Stewart & Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1908
- Dailey v. SpringfieldSupreme Court of Georgia · 1915
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.