Greer v. Young
38 S.E. 314, 113 Ga. 120, 1901 Ga. LEXIS 175
Opinion
When in an action for land the right of the plaintiffs to recover is based on an alleged deed, which has been destroyed, and a copy of which can not he produced, the plaintiff must fail, unless the evidence not only satisfactorily shows the existence and loss of the original deed, but its contents and the fact of its proper execution. Smith v. Smith, 106 Ga. 303. Neither of the two last requisites was sufficiently shown to authorize a recovery in the present case, and the court erred in overruling the motion for a new trial.
' Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Greer v. Young, 38 S.E. 314, 113 Ga. 120, 1901 Ga. LEXIS 175 (Ga. 1901).
38 S.E. 314 (Greer v. Young) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Pugh v. Moore
62 S.E.2d 153 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1950)
Stanaland v. Horne
158 S.E. 595 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1931)
Horne & Ponder v. O. B. & E. J. Evans
120 S.E. 787 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1923)
Griffin v. Wise
41 S.E. 1003 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1902)