Legal Opinion

Bell v. Grant

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided November 6, 1979No. 35275PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Nichols, Chief Justice.

Certiorari was granted to determine whether or not the Court of Appeals erred in holding that it had jurisdiction of the appeal in this case and that the intent of the testatrix was a question for a jury, rather than for the court. The facts and proceedings below insofar as relevant are stated in Grant v. Bell, 150 Ga. App. 141 (257 SE2d 12) (1979).

1. The Court of Appeals correctly held that it had jurisdiction of the appeal. Construction of the will was only indirectly or incidentally involved in this action for money had and received. Reece v. McCrary, 179 Ga. 812…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Snellings v. DownerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1942
  2. Armstrong v. MertsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1947
  3. Watts v. FinleySupreme Court of Georgia · 1939
  4. Reece v. McCrarySupreme Court of Georgia · 1934
  5. Williams v. McCoy Lumber Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1978

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Powell v. ThorsenSupreme Court of Georgia · 1984
  2. Grant v. BellSupreme Court of Georgia · 1980
  3. Grant v. BellCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1980
  4. Davis v. JonesCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1988
  5. George v. D'ANGELOCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1984

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