Legal Opinion
White v. Spahr
Supreme Court of Georgia
Decided May 10, 1950No. 17087PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Hawkins, Justice.
(After stating the foregoing facts.) 1. It is contended by the plaintiffs that the verdict and decree in fav- or of the defendant should be set aside on the general grounds of the motion for a new trial, and we will first dispose of this question.
It appears from the record in this case that the defendant’s deed does not refer to lot No. 67, and it is contended by the plaintiffs that, this being true, he can have no valid claim to any part of lot 67.
It is contended by the defendant that, while his deed calls for parts of lots 62 and 63, by following the boundaries given in the…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Harris v. HullSupreme Court of Georgia · 1883
- Thompson v. HillSupreme Court of Georgia · 1912
- Johnson v. McKaySupreme Court of Georgia · 1903
- Barbee v. BarbeeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1947
- Doe ex dem. Summerlin v. RoeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1856
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Burgess v. NabersCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1970
- Floyd v. CarswellSupreme Court of Georgia · 1954
- McCann v. MillerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1985
- Sharpe v. Savannah River Lumber CorporationSupreme Court of Georgia · 1955
- Rowell v. RowellSupreme Court of Georgia · 1956
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.