Legal Opinion

Hill v. Smith

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided October 15, 1926No. 5477PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGilbert, J.

The defendant in error insists that the rule is as follows: “The test, then, whether an instrument be a deed or mortgage is necessarily whether the interest acquired by the holder of an instrument is such an interest as can be extinguished by the voluntary act of the debtor alone. If it can be, the instrument is defeasible, and does not pass . . absolute title,” etc. She contends that the terms of this instrument bring it within the general rule, and that the instrument will be construed to be a mortgage. This general rule was applied in the following decisions of this court: Frost v. Allen,…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Burckhalter v. Planters Loan & Savings BankSupreme Court of Georgia · 1897
  2. Pitts v. MaierSupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
  3. Williamson v. Orient InsuranceSupreme Court of Georgia · 1897
  4. Scott v. HughesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1906
  5. Pirkle v. Equitable Mortgage Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1896

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Ivor B. Clark Co. v. HoganDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1968
  2. Camp v. TealCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1932
  3. Wilson v. VocheCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1934
  4. Minton v. Raytheon Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1996

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

Powered by the Exa API