Adams v. Jackson

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Adams v. Jackson

94 S.E. 914, 21 Ga. App. 681, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 478

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 29, 1918

Docket8706

StatusPublished

This text of 94 S.E. 914 (Adams v. Jackson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Adams v. Jackson, 94 S.E. 914, 21 Ga. App. 681, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 478 (Ga. Ct. App. 1918).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

Mrs. Jackson executed a warranty deed conveying to Friedman a certain tract of land, and subsequently executed a warranty deed conveying another tract to Atkinson and Adams. Later Adams bought, the interest of Atkinson. Adams and Friedman jointly sued Mrs. Jackson in a justice’s court, alleging breach of warranty, each depending upon the separate warranties in their respective deeds. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Mrs. Jackson, and a petition for certiorari was sanctioned. Upon the hearing, on the answer of the trial justice, the judge of the superior court overruled the certiorari and denied a new trial. Held, that this ruling was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

Wade, O. J., and Jenkins, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Luke, J.

Mrs. Jackson executed a warranty deed conveying to Friedman a certain tract of land, and subsequently executed a warranty deed conveying another tract to Atkinson and Adams. Later Adams bought, the interest of Atkinson. Adams and Friedman jointly sued Mrs. Jackson in a justice’s court, alleging breach of warranty, each depending upon the separate warranties in their respective deeds. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Mrs. Jackson, and a petition for certiorari was sanctioned. Upon the hearing, on the answer of the trial justice, the judge of the superior court overruled the certiorari and denied a new trial. Held, that this ruling was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

Wade, O. J., and Jenkins, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

94 S.E. 914, 21 Ga. App. 681, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 478, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/adams-v-jackson-gactapp-1918.