Brown v. Hester

150 S.E. 556, 169 Ga. 410, 1929 Ga. LEXIS 373
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedNovember 14, 1929
DocketNo. 7312
StatusPublished
Cited by21 cases

This text of 150 S.E. 556 (Brown v. Hester) 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
Brown v. Hester, 150 S.E. 556, 169 Ga. 410, 1929 Ga. LEXIS 373 (Ga. 1929).

Opinion

Gilbert, J.

This is a suit between eoterminus landowners who hold under grants from the same person. The plaintiff obtained his grant in 1923; the defendant in 1913. The defendant pleaded title by deed, by prescription, by parol agreement of the respective owners at the date of his grant, and by acquiescence for seven years. The verdict was for the defendant. A motion for a new trial was based on the general grounds, and on assignments of error on portions of the charge of the court on the law of title by prescription. The motion was overruled, and the plaintiff .excepted. Held:

1. Title by prescription was not involved. Defendant had not been in possessidn twenty years. Prescription under color of title for seven years was not involved, because color of title will not extend beyond the description in the grant. If the small bit of land was not within the boundaries of lot No. 1, it was not covered by or included in the grant from Mrs. Gilbert to Killian. Eor these reasons the assignments [411]*411of error on the subject of title by prescription need not be considered. Under the view we take of the case as stated hereinbelow, it is immaterial whether the court’s instructions on the subject of prescription were erroneous or not.

No. 7312. November 14, 1929. McClure, Hale & McClure, for plaintiff.

2. A line between two coterminous landowners may be established: (a.) “Where the boundary line between two estates is indefinite or unascertained, the owners may by parol agreement establish a division line, and the line thus established will afterwards control their deeds, notwithstanding the statute of frauds.” Or (b) “Under the code, acquiescence in a dividing line for a period of seven years or more will operate to establish the line, without regard to any previous parol agreement between the parties as to the line.” Civil Code (1910), § 3821; Farr v. Woolfolk, 118 Ga. 277 (2), 279 (45 S. E. 230); Bennett v. Swafford, 146 Ga. 473 (91 S. E. 553); Barfield v. Birrick, 151 Ga. 618 (108 S. E. 43) ; Johnson v. Mary-Leila Cotton Mills, 155 Ga. 344 (116 S. E. 609); Childers v. Dedman, 157 Ga. 632 (122 S. E. 45); Henderson v. Walker, 157 Ga. 856, 862 (122 S. E. 613).

3. The evidence demanded a finding that Killian erected a fence where it now stands, as a dividing line, and that it has been acquiesced in from 1913 to the filing of this suit in 1927, a period of more than seven years. The verdict for the defendant therefore was demanded.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Related

Cothran v. Burk
216 S.E.2d 319 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1975)
Gilbert v. Reynolds
212 S.E.2d 332 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1975)
Howell v. Baynes
166 S.E.2d 359 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1969)
Stripland v. Nalley
132 S.E.2d 849 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1963)
Clay v. Stanfield
119 S.E.2d 564 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1961)
Collins v. Burchfield
110 S.E.2d 368 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1959)
Greenway v. Altman
80 S.E.2d 89 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1954)
Watts v. Pettigrew
63 S.E.2d 897 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1951)
Warwick v. Ocean Pond Fishing Club
58 S.E.2d 383 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1950)
Hickox v. Griffin
55 S.E.2d 351 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1949)
Crawford v. Cook
51 S.E.2d 422 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1949)
Etheridge v. Gillen
34 S.E.2d 105 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1945)
Wood v. Fraker
199 Ga. 190 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1945)
Smith v. Clemons
31 S.E.2d 621 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1944)
Foster v. Thomas
20 S.E.2d 80 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1942)
Lockwood v. Daniel
17 S.E.2d 542 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1941)
Robertson v. Abernathy
16 S.E.2d 584 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1941)
Bradley v. Shelton
7 S.E.2d 261 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1940)
Sikes v. Mutual Benefit Life Insurance
187 S.E. 61 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1936)
Hatch v. Miller
176 S.E. 631 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1934)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
150 S.E. 556, 169 Ga. 410, 1929 Ga. LEXIS 373, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brown-v-hester-ga-1929.