Couch v. Turner
This text of 17 Ga. 489 (Couch v. Turner) 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
By the Court.
delivering the opinion.
Perhaps a sufficient reply to this showing would be, that the defendant’s information may not be reliable. And surely the-rights of the plaintiff are not to depend upon a mere peradventure.
The showing is insufficient in any aspect of it.' Upon executing to the Turners an indemnity against costs, Adams had the right to use their name, with or without their consent. And this the Court decided should be done. And whether or not the use, of the name of the Turners was necessary to enable Adams to enforce his claim, he, and not Couch, was the best judge.
[491]*491We recognize the general rule, as contended for by Counsel for plaintiff in error, namely: that a person ought not to be ■made a lessor in ejectment, who has no subsisting title or interest in the premises. There are exceptions, however, even to this rule; and under special circumstances, the Court will .permit the demises to be retained.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
17 Ga. 489, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/couch-v-turner-ga-1855.