Combs v. Spurling

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Combs v. Spurling

65 S.E.2d 63, 83 Ga. App. 854, 1951 Ga. App. LEXIS 983

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 19, 1951

Docket33449

StatusPublished

This text of 65 S.E.2d 63 (Combs v. Spurling) 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

Combs v. Spurling, 65 S.E.2d 63, 83 Ga. App. 854, 1951 Ga. App. LEXIS 983 (Ga. Ct. App. 1951).

Pincite

Opinion

Gardner, J.

Where it appears that a husband and wife are [855]*855together and there is no legal separation at the time of her death, the right to the possession of the household effects is in the husband. See Shaner Motor Company v. Williams, 36 Ga. App. 766 (138 S. E. 274). Where there are no children, the issue of a marriage, and there is no will, the husband is the sole heir of his wife. In these circumstances, the household furnishings in the marital domicile at the time of and subsequent to the wife’s death are presumably the property of the surviving husband, even though the same were purchased by the wife in her own name and even though a portion thereof were acquired by the wife prior to her marriage and were retained by her after her marriage and constituted a part of the furnishings of the marital domicile.

The alleged parol gift of these furnishings by the wife, shortly prior to her death, to her brother, the plaintiff, there being no delivery thereof to the brother, is not sufficient to establish title to the property in the brother as against the husband. See Anderson v. Baker, 1 Ga. 595; Evans v. Lipscomb, 31 Ga. 71(3). And see Upchurch v. Upchurch, 76 Ga. App. 215 (45 S. E. 2d, 855). There is nothing in the case of Purvis v. Calvert Mortgage Co., 158 Ga. 879 (124 S. E. 702), nor in Broome v. Davis, 87 Ga. 584 (13 S. E. 749), to the contrary of what is here ruled.

The foregoing is true even though at the time of the death of the wife, the husband was not working and supporting his wife.

It follows that the trial judge did not err in directing a verdict for the defendant husband.

Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre, P.J., and Townsend, J., concur.

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

Gardner, J.

Where it appears that a husband and wife are [855]*855together and there is no legal separation at the time of her death, the right to the possession of the household effects is in the husband. See Shaner Motor Company v. Williams, 36 Ga. App. 766 (138 S. E. 274). Where there are no children, the issue of a marriage, and there is no will, the husband is the sole heir of his wife. In these circumstances, the household furnishings in the marital domicile at the time of and subsequent to the wife’s death are presumably the property of the surviving husband, even though the same were purchased by the wife in her own name and even though a portion thereof were acquired by the wife prior to her marriage and were retained by her after her marriage and constituted a part of the furnishings of the marital domicile.

The alleged parol gift of these furnishings by the wife, shortly prior to her death, to her brother, the plaintiff, there being no delivery thereof to the brother, is not sufficient to establish title to the property in the brother as against the husband. See Anderson v. Baker, 1 Ga. 595; Evans v. Lipscomb, 31 Ga. 71(3). And see Upchurch v. Upchurch, 76 Ga. App. 215 (45 S. E. 2d, 855). There is nothing in the case of Purvis v. Calvert Mortgage Co., 158 Ga. 879 (124 S. E. 702), nor in Broome v. Davis, 87 Ga. 584 (13 S. E. 749), to the contrary of what is here ruled.

The foregoing is true even though at the time of the death of the wife, the husband was not working and supporting his wife.

It follows that the trial judge did not err in directing a verdict for the defendant husband.

Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre, P.J., and Townsend, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

65 S.E.2d 63, 83 Ga. App. 854, 1951 Ga. App. LEXIS 983, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/combs-v-spurling-gactapp-1951.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack