Deal v. George
This text of 91 S.E. 407 (Deal v. George) 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
1. The facts of this case showed prescriptive title in the plaintiff. The defendants failed to show that any of the land in dispute was covered by the deeds introduced by them. The defendants failed to show possession by any of. the grantors of the land in dispute. Such being the case, it was error to instruct the jury in regard to the law applicable- to - disputed land-lines between coterminous owners.
2. Certain deeds were admitted over objection. On another trial these deeds, or either of them, should be admitted when shown to cover any part of the land in controversy; or they should be rejected if such materiality is not shown.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
91 S.E. 407, 146 Ga. 439, 1917 Ga. LEXIS 332, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/deal-v-george-ga-1917.