Georgia Loan & Trust Co. v. Dyer

Supreme Court of Georgia

Georgia Loan & Trust Co. v. Dyer

223 S.E.2d 801, 236 Ga. 392, 1976 Ga. LEXIS 886

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 11, 1976

Docket30239

StatusPublished

This text of 223 S.E.2d 801 (Georgia Loan & Trust Co. v. Dyer) 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

Georgia Loan & Trust Co. v. Dyer, 223 S.E.2d 801, 236 Ga. 392, 1976 Ga. LEXIS 886 (Ga. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Gunter, Justice.

This is the second appearance of this case in this court. In Ga. Loan & Trust Co. v. Dyer, 233 Ga. 957 (213 SE2d 864) (1975), an interlocutory appeal, we affirmed the trial court’s judgment granting a temporary injunction but remanded the case for final decision in the trial court. We ruled there on the issue of the validity of the description contained in the Dyer security deed, but we held that the issues of improper attestation of the security deed to Dyer and lack of consideration for the note and security deed to Dyer could not be finally adjudicated on the interlocutory appeal.

Following our decision the trial court, by agreement of the parties, conducted a trial and then rendered a judgment in favor of Dyer on all issues. Georgia Loan has again appealed.

The issue of the improper attestation and the invalid recording of the security deed to Dyer, so as to avoid valid constructive notice, was presented to the trial judge for decision. He decided this issue adversely to the appellant, and we hold that the evidence was adequate to support this finding by the trial judge.

Argued September 4, 1975 Decided February 11, 1976 Rehearing denied March 2, 1976. Jenkins & Landrum, Terry K. Floyd, for appellant. Douglas W. McDonald, William E. Woodside, for appellees.

Also, the issue of lack of consideration for the note and security deed given to Dyer was presented to the trial judge, and he also found for Dyer on this issue. The appellant’s arguments on lack of consideration are very involved and technical, but, having examined the transcript, we cannot say that the evidence did not support the conclusion reached by the trial judge.

The issue of the validity of the description contained in the security deed to Dyer was decided by this court on the first appeal. Ga. Loan & Trust Co. v. Dyer, supra, (1975).

We find no reversible error.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Gunter, Justice.

This is the second appearance of this case in this court. In Ga. Loan & Trust Co. v. Dyer, 233 Ga. 957 (213 SE2d 864) (1975), an interlocutory appeal, we affirmed the trial court’s judgment granting a temporary injunction but remanded the case for final decision in the trial court. We ruled there on the issue of the validity of the description contained in the Dyer security deed, but we held that the issues of improper attestation of the security deed to Dyer and lack of consideration for the note and security deed to Dyer could not be finally adjudicated on the interlocutory appeal.

Following our decision the trial court, by agreement of the parties, conducted a trial and then rendered a judgment in favor of Dyer on all issues. Georgia Loan has again appealed.

The issue of the improper attestation and the invalid recording of the security deed to Dyer, so as to avoid valid constructive notice, was presented to the trial judge for decision. He decided this issue adversely to the appellant, and we hold that the evidence was adequate to support this finding by the trial judge.

Argued September 4, 1975 Decided February 11, 1976 Rehearing denied March 2, 1976. Jenkins & Landrum, Terry K. Floyd, for appellant. Douglas W. McDonald, William E. Woodside, for appellees.

Also, the issue of lack of consideration for the note and security deed given to Dyer was presented to the trial judge, and he also found for Dyer on this issue. The appellant’s arguments on lack of consideration are very involved and technical, but, having examined the transcript, we cannot say that the evidence did not support the conclusion reached by the trial judge.

The issue of the validity of the description contained in the security deed to Dyer was decided by this court on the first appeal. Ga. Loan & Trust Co. v. Dyer, supra, (1975).

We find no reversible error.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

223 S.E.2d 801, 236 Ga. 392, 1976 Ga. LEXIS 886, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/georgia-loan-trust-co-v-dyer-ga-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack