Georgia Loan & Trust Co. v. Milltown Lumber Co.

Supreme Court of Georgia

Georgia Loan & Trust Co. v. Milltown Lumber Co.

57 S.E. 761, 128 Ga. 525, 1907 Ga. LEXIS 158

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedJune 14, 1907

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 57 S.E. 761 (Georgia Loan & Trust Co. v. Milltown Lumber Co.) 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. Milltown Lumber Co., 57 S.E. 761, 128 Ga. 525, 1907 Ga. LEXIS 158 (Ga. 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

Lumpkin, J.

The warrantors were made parties defendant. 'They filed pleadings insisting that a conveyance which was atiacked by the plaintiff, and under which the original defendant •claimed, was valid and conveyed title. They were interested in .sustaining the title and thus saving themselves from liability on their warranties. It was contended that the conveyance in question was void as matter of law. Had this court so held, it would have bound both the original defendant and his warrantors who were parties. They were therefore directly interested in sustaining- the judgment which refused the injunction. It is suggested in the brief of counsel that in the court below it was argued that the order making the warrantors parties was void, and that they were not lawful parties. But there is no suggestion of any thing ¡of this kind in the record or bill of exceptions.

Writ of error dismissed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Lumpkin, J.

The warrantors were made parties defendant. 'They filed pleadings insisting that a conveyance which was atiacked by the plaintiff, and under which the original defendant •claimed, was valid and conveyed title. They were interested in .sustaining the title and thus saving themselves from liability on their warranties. It was contended that the conveyance in question was void as matter of law. Had this court so held, it would have bound both the original defendant and his warrantors who were parties. They were therefore directly interested in sustaining- the judgment which refused the injunction. It is suggested in the brief of counsel that in the court below it was argued that the order making the warrantors parties was void, and that they were not lawful parties. But there is no suggestion of any thing ¡of this kind in the record or bill of exceptions.

Writ of error dismissed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 S.E. 761, 128 Ga. 525, 1907 Ga. LEXIS 158, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/georgia-loan-trust-co-v-milltown-lumber-co-ga-1907.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack