Gibson v. Hough & Sons
Supreme Court of Georgia
Claim. Levy and sale. Heed. Mortgage. Equity. Before Judge Crawford. Talbot Superior Court. March Term, 1877. The only exceptions taken by the claimant were to the charge as contained in the last division of the opinion, and the refusal to charge to the contrary. No motion for a new trial was made. The facts are fully stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Bleckley, Judge.
1. An absolute, unconditional deed either conveys title or it does not.- There is no middle possibility. This is true quite irrespective of the ultimate objept which the instru*589ment is intended to serve, or the consideration on which it is founded. If it conveys title, the grantee is put in a situation to pass title back into the grantor; and if he obligates himself by bond to do so, he can comply with his undertaking. If it does not convey title, the nominal grantee’s situation, in respect to the title, is just the same after taking the deed as it was before; he has no title,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hughes v. EdwardsSupreme Court of the United States · 1824
- Peterson v. ClarkNew York Supreme Court · 1818
- West v. BennettSupreme Court of Georgia · 1877
3Cited by7 opinions
- Parrott v. BakerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1889
- Phinizy v. ClarkSupreme Court of Georgia · 1879
- Lowe v. AllenSupreme Court of Georgia · 1881
- Ward v. LordSupreme Court of Georgia · 1897
- Pirkle v. Equitable Mortgage Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1896
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.