Boyd v. Lofton

34 Ga. 494
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedJune 15, 1866
StatusPublished

This text of 34 Ga. 494 (Boyd v. Lofton) 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.

Bluebook
Boyd v. Lofton, 34 Ga. 494 (Ga. 1866).

Opinion

Habéis, J.

The injunction in this case was improvidently granted: we are persuaded it would not have been, had all the facts been before the Judge at that time, as fully as they were presented when the motion to dissolve was made and sustained.

It was a strange proceeding on,the part of complainant, in the uninterrupted possession of the mill, to seek to restrain respondents as he did. The defendants in error, by a special covenant in the mortgage which they took of Eavens on land in Terrill county, as security for the purchase money of the mill property, expressly reserved the right of peacable re-entry upon it, upon failure to pay as stipulated. Here was, then, a clear legal right which could not be gainsayed or restrained. There is no force in the position argued, that the mortgage was void as to the mill property, because it had not been recorded in Webster county, where it was situated. There was no mortgage whatever on the mill property; the title to it had never passed out of Lofton the vendor; he sold it to Eavens, simply giving his bond to make titles when all the purchase money was paid.

[498]*498It would have been an absurdity, not having parted with his' title, to take a mortgage on what he already held by a higher tenure.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
34 Ga. 494, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/boyd-v-lofton-ga-1866.