Batson v. Benford
This text of 46 S.E. 93 (Batson v. Benford) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1. Where a married woman applies for a homestead out of her husband’s property, under the Civil Code,. §2866, and the application or schedule does not affirmatively show that the husband has refused to make the application, the homestead so recorded is void (Hirsch v. Stinson, 112 Ga. 348, and cit.), and is therefore inadmissible in evidence as a muniment of title.
2. An order of a judge of the superior court authorizing the sale of such property as a homestead is likewise inadmissible for the same reason.
3. Where such land is sold and other land bought in an adjoining county and the deed taken in the name of the wife, who subsequently borrows money and gives a mortgage on the land so purchased, and such land is sold under foreclosure' proceedings and bought by a purchaser without notice of the alleged [257]*257homestead or the rights of the husband, the purchaser remaining in possession for eleven years, the children of the husband and wife can not recover this land either as beneficiaries of the homestead or as heirs at law of their father. Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
46 S.E. 93, 119 Ga. 256, 1903 Ga. LEXIS 778, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/batson-v-benford-ga-1903.