Legal Opinion
Johns v. Nix
Supreme Court of Georgia
Decided May 26, 1942No. 14029PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Atkinson, Presiding Justice.
1. So far as it might be contended that the plaintiff would be entitled to recover upon the theory of a parol gift, such contention must fail, because no gift was alleged with sufficient definiteness, nor was it alleged that valuable improvements were erected upon the property upon the faith of the donor’s promise or declared intention to malee a gift. Code, §§ 37-802, 37-804; Holland v. Atkinson, 112 Ga. 346 (37 S. E. 380); Swan Oil Co. v. Linder, 123 Ga. 550, 553 (51 S. E. 622); Hodgson v. Hodgson, 28 Ga. App. 250 (110 S. E. 754).
2. If the plaintiff could recover…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- F. & W. Grand Five-Ten-Twenty-Five Cent Stores Inc. v. EisemanSupreme Court of Georgia · 1925
- Taylor v. BolesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1941
- Swan Oil Co. v. LinderSupreme Court of Georgia · 1905
- Holland v. AtkinsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1900
- Coffey v. CobbSupreme Court of Georgia · 1913
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Johns v. NixSupreme Court of Georgia · 1943
- Christopher v. WhitmireSupreme Court of Georgia · 1945
- Barnett v. HenrySupreme Court of Georgia · 1946