Milsaps v. Johnson
Supreme Court of Georgia
Debt qui tam, from Fannin Superior Court. Decision by Judge Trippe, at November Term, 1856. The plaintiff, Thomas Milsaps, brought an action of debt, qui tam, against Joseph Johnson, junior, to recover the penalty prescribed by statute 32. Henry 8, Sec. 2, for bargaining for, and buying a pretended title to a lot of land, of ■which plaintiff was seized and possessed. The amount sued for was two thousand dollars, the alleged value of the land.
Read the full summary
Debt qui tam, from Fannin Superior Court. Decision by Judge Trippe, at November Term, 1856. The plaintiff, Thomas Milsaps, brought an action of debt, qui tam, against Joseph Johnson, junior, to recover the penalty prescribed by statute 32. Henry 8, Sec. 2, for bargaining for, and buying a pretended title to a lot of land, of ■which plaintiff was seized and possessed. The amount sued for was two thousand dollars, the alleged value of the land. The defendant demurred to the declaration, on the ground that the said statute of Henry Sth, was not of force in Georgia, and that an action for buying…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
Lumpkin, J.
delivering the opinion.
Is a party in this State entitled to a qui tarn action, to recover the penalty prescribed by the 32. Henry 8th, for the sale of a pretended, or as it is sometimes called, a pretense title to land ?
It is exceedingly questionable whether any portion of this act ought ever to have been adopted by our Courts, for the simple reason, that the policy in which this statute originated, does not and never did exist here. When this Court was organized, it found that it was enforced pretty generally by the Circuit Courts in this State, in a very limited form…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Doe ex dem. Cain v. RoeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1857