Gallogly v. Bradco, Inc.

392 S.E.2d 529, 260 Ga. 311
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedJune 21, 1990
DocketS90A0890, S90X0891
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 392 S.E.2d 529 (Gallogly v. Bradco, Inc.) 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.

Bluebook
Gallogly v. Bradco, Inc., 392 S.E.2d 529, 260 Ga. 311 (Ga. 1990).

Opinion

Weltner, Justice.

In 1989, we affirmed a 1988 judgment of the trial court ordering specific performance of an obligation to sell land. 1 Thereafter, a dispute arose concerning ad valorem taxes that had accrued during the pendency of the appeal. The owner refused to convey the land when the purchaser offered to pay a sum less than the stated contract price. The trial court again ordered specific performance, and made further direction concerning payment of the purchase price.

The owner appealed, insisting that the buyer had been unwilling to pay the stated contract price, and that the trial court had modified a final judgment. The purchaser filed a cross-appeal from the rejection of its counterclaim for abusive litigation.

1. There is. no contention that the purchaser’s 1988 tender was not valid. The right to acquire the property was established by that tender. No additional “tender,” as that term is used in OCGA § 13-4-24, was necessary to preserve that right. 2 The owner remains bound to specific performance.

2. The order entered by the trial court after the first appeal was not an impermissible modification of a final judgment, as contended by the owner. The second decree became necessary only because the owner refused to obey the first decree. “A superior court shall have full power to mold its decrees so as to meet the exigencies of each case and shall have full power to enforce its decrees when rendered.” OCGA § 23-4-31.

3. We have examined the enumerations of error contained in the cross-appeal, and find no entitlement to further relief.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.
1

Gallogly v. Bradco, Inc., 259 Ga. XXX (1989), affirmed without opinion.

2

For a similar case involving the effective date of tender, as required for the exercise of an option, see Jackson v. Southern Pan &c. Co., 260 Ga. 150 (390 SE2d 393) (1990).

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

Related

Smith v. Smith
748 S.E.2d 456 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2013)
Nowlin v. Davis
599 S.E.2d 128 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2004)
Nowlin v. Davis
538 S.E.2d 900 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2000)
Hughes v. Great Southern Midway, Inc.
454 S.E.2d 130 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1995)
Cobb County v. Buchanan
413 S.E.2d 198 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
392 S.E.2d 529, 260 Ga. 311, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gallogly-v-bradco-inc-ga-1990.