Legal Opinion

Waller v. State Highway Department

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided February 7, 1963No. 21885PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Head, Presiding Justice.

1. The testimony of one of the defendants shows that he did not examine the deed records to ascertain the width of the highway, nor did he procure anyone to examine such records. An examination of the recorded deed of the State would have revealed the line of the defendants’ property. A duly recorded deed is constructive notice of the grantee’s interest and title. “Constructive notice is notice to the world.” Clark v. C. T. H. Corp., 181 Ga. 710 (1) (184 SE 592); Poore v. Poore, 210 Ga. 371, 372 (80 SE2d 294).

2. The defendant is not entitled to prevail upon his…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Standard Oil Co. of Kentucky v. State Revenue CommissionSupreme Court of Georgia · 1934
  2. Booth v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1908
  3. Alexander v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1876
  4. Clark v. C. T. H. Corp.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1936
  5. McCallum v. AlmandSupreme Court of Georgia · 1957

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Filipo v. ChangHawaii Supreme Court · 1980
  2. Department of Public Health v. PerryCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1971
  3. Johnson v. CaldwellCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1979
  4. Muggridge v. State Highway DepartmentSupreme Court of Georgia · 1972
  5. Mosley v. FosterSupreme Court of Georgia · 1967

1 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