Legal Opinion

Jillson v. Barton

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided October 4, 1976No. 52547PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Deen, Presiding Judge.

1. The original complaint was alleged to be "based on the theory of equitable conversion and indirect injury and damage to the esthetic [sic] value of her property” caused by the defendant-appellees’ "constructing, grating and changing the contour of land directly adjacent to plaintiffs property.” Thus the gravamen of the action is indirect damage to the plaintiffs property through actions taken by the defendants on their own property.

At the outset, we note that the theory of equitable conversion is inapplicable to a suit for "indirect injury and damage” to property;…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. DeVaughn v. McLeroySupreme Court of Georgia · 1889
  2. Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Americus Construction Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1909
  3. Lambert v. Georgia Power Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1936
  4. Rhodes v. Levitz Furniture Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1975
  5. Paul v. BaileyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1964

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Quebell P. Parker v. Scrap Metal ProcessorsCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2004
  2. Wernke v. HalasIndiana Court of Appeals · 1992
  3. Hoffman v. Atlanta Gas Light Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1992
  4. Baumann v. SniderCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2000
  5. News-Press Publishing Company, Inc. v. KalleCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1985

6 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