Hill v. Smith
Supreme Court of Georgia
1DissentAtkinson, J.
The distinguishing feature in this instrument is the clause “that when said note together with all accrued interest and costs, shall have been fully paid, this deed is to become void, and the clerk of the superior court of Barrow County is hereby granted authority to cancel this deed of record.” As the so-called deed is to become void by payment of the note, payment will completely extinguish all interest of the grantee under this instrument, and consequently the clause is a defeasance clause.
In Scott v. Hughes, 124 Ga. 1000 (supra), decided by all the Justices, it was held: “A paper in the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Burckhalter v. Planters Loan & Savings BankSupreme Court of Georgia · 1897
- Pitts v. MaierSupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
- Scott v. HughesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1906
- Lubroline Oil Co. v. Athens Savings BankSupreme Court of Georgia · 1898
- Ward v. LordSupreme Court of Georgia · 1897
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.