Connally v. Morris

116 S.E. 338, 29 Ga. App. 752, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 183
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedFebruary 23, 1923
Docket13655
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 116 S.E. 338 (Connally v. Morris) 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
Connally v. Morris, 116 S.E. 338, 29 Ga. App. 752, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 183 (Ga. Ct. App. 1923).

Opinion

Stephens, J.

A surety upon an eventual condemnation bond filed by the defendant when arresting á summary proceeding instituted under the Civil Code (1910), § 5385, to dispossess the defendant as a tenant [753]*753holding over, is bound by whatever judgment is rendered against the principal, even though the surety did not appear and plead and the judgment rendered was by the consent of the principal and not of the surety, and was for a larger sum than was recoverable. It follows, therefore, that where judgment was entered against the principal and surety upon such a bond, an affidavit of illegality filed by the surety, attacking the ''judgment as being illegal and void upon the ground that the judgment, which included a recovery for future rent, was for a sum beyond the plaintiff’s right to recover, and that the principal’s consent thereto increased the surety’s risk, set up no valid and legal ground of illegality, and was properly dismissed. The principle announced in Jackson v. Guilmartin, 61 Ga. 544, and approved in Price v. Carlton, 121 Ga. 12, 23 (48 S. E. 721, 68 L. R. A. 736), although applied in the ease of a surety upon a replevy bond filed by the defendant in a trover suit, is controlling-in the ease of a surety upon an eventual condemnation money bond filed by a tenant to arrest, summary proceedings against him as a tenant holding over. Judgment affirmed.

Decided February 23, 1923. P. J. Smith, Wolver M. Smith, for plaintiffs in error. John J. Strickland, contra. Jenkins, P. J., and Bell, J., concur.

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

Related

Houston General Insurance v. Stein Steel & Supply Co.
215 S.E.2d 511 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1975)
Pickett v. Chamblee Construction Co.
186 S.E.2d 123 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1971)
O'Leary v. Smith
168 S.E.2d 886 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1969)
Sargeant v. Starr
116 S.E.2d 633 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1960)
Noras v. McCord
200 S.E. 513 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1938)
Ford v. Eskridge
186 S.E. 204 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1936)
Taliaferro v. Farkas
166 S.E. 426 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1932)
Roberts v. Crosby
158 S.E. 444 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1931)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
116 S.E. 338, 29 Ga. App. 752, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 183, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/connally-v-morris-gactapp-1923.