Legal Opinion

Jackson v. Lipham

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided July 18, 1924No. 4285PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHines, J.

1. The charge of the court, to which the defendant excepts in the first ground of the amendment to his motion for new trial, is not erroneous for any of the reasons assigned by the movant. If at the time the defendant purchased this land, when it was sold by the administrator of William Jackson as the property of the latter, he knew that Sam T. Jackson owned an undivided half interest therein, the mere fact that Sam T. Jackson stood by at such sale and permitted the defendant to purchase this property without disclosing his title would not estop said Jackson from asserting whatever title he…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Bourquin v. BourquinSupreme Court of Georgia · 1900
  2. Callaway v. IrvinSupreme Court of Georgia · 1905
  3. Tune v. BeelandSupreme Court of Georgia · 1908
  4. Lamar v. PearreSupreme Court of Georgia · 1892
  5. Stonecipher v. KearSupreme Court of Georgia · 1908

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Maloy v. DixonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1972
  2. Hughes v. CobbSupreme Court of Georgia · 1942
  3. Bennett v. DavisSupreme Court of Georgia · 1946
  4. Atlanta Recycled Fiber Co. v. Tri-Cities Steel Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1979
  5. Groover v. SimmonsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1927

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

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

Powered by the Exa API