Crider v. Southern Railway Co.

141 S.E. 915, 37 Ga. App. 727, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 583
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedFebruary 18, 1928
Docket18160
StatusPublished

This text of 141 S.E. 915 (Crider v. Southern Railway Co.) 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
Crider v. Southern Railway Co., 141 S.E. 915, 37 Ga. App. 727, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 583 (Ga. Ct. App. 1928).

Opinion

•Stephens, J.

1. One in possessidn of land and with an equitable interest , therein as owner, subject to his deed to secure a debt, has such an interest in the property that he can maintain an action for damage thereto. Especially is this true where the holder of the legal title, after the institution of the suit, reconveys the legal title to the plaintiff. Fulton County v. Amorous, 89 Ga. 614 (3) (16 S. E. 201); Towaliga Falls Power Co. v. Washington, 136 Ga. 397 (71 S. E. 731); City of Atlanta v. Callaway, 137 Ga. 495 (73 S. E. 736); Mack v. Augusta Belt Line Railway Co., 28 Ga. App. 816 (113 S. E. 66); Fender v. Lee County, 31 Ga. App. 604 (121 S. E. 843).

[728]*728Decided February 18, 1928. John 0. Owen, Scott & Hornbuckle, 0. C. Hancock, J. W. Bow-den, for plaintiff. McDaniel & Neely, for defendant.

2. This being a suit wherein the plaintiff seeks to recover damages for the destruction of a barn upon her premises by lire which it is alleged was negligently caused by the emission of sparks from a railway train of the defendant, and it appearing from the petition that at the time of the injury complained of the plaintiff was in possession as the owner of the equitable title in the premises, subject to a deed conveying the title to a third person to secure a debt, and it appearing from an amendment to the petition that the holder of the legal title, after the institution of the suit, reeonveyed the title to the plaintiff, and the allegations in the petition otherwise setting out facts from which it could be inferred that the injury complained of was caused by negligent acts of the defendant, the petition as amended, in both counts, set out a cause of action, and the court erred in sustaining the general demurrers to both counts of the petition.

Judgment reversed,.

Jenhvns, 1‘. J., wnd Bell, J., concur.

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

Related

Fulton County v. Amorous
16 S.E. 201 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1892)
Towaliga Falls Power Co. v. Washington
71 S.E. 731 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1911)
City of Atlanta v. Callaway
73 S.E. 736 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1912)
Mack v. Augusta Belt Railway Co.
113 S.E. 66 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1922)
Fender v. Lee County
121 S.E. 843 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1924)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
141 S.E. 915, 37 Ga. App. 727, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 583, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crider-v-southern-railway-co-gactapp-1928.