Hall v. VNB Mortgage Corp.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Hall v. VNB Mortgage Corp.

306 S.E.2d 359, 167 Ga. App. 219, 1983 Ga. App. LEXIS 2474

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJune 29, 1983

Docket65890

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 306 S.E.2d 359 (Hall v. VNB Mortgage Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hall v. VNB Mortgage Corp., 306 S.E.2d 359, 167 Ga. App. 219, 1983 Ga. App. LEXIS 2474 (Ga. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

Deen, Presiding Judge.

Appellee brought'a dispossessory proceeding against appellants Joe and Jeralyne Hall on the ground that they were in possession of certain property as tenants and were “holding said house and premises without right, title or interest.” Appellants answered denying the allegations and moved to dismiss for failure of the one ground of relief shown in the affidavit to support an action under OCGA § 44-7-50 (former Code Ann. § 61-301). The writ of possession was granted and on appeal from that judgment appellants enumerate as error the denial of their motion to dismiss and the failure of the trial court to make findings of fact and conclusions of law as required by the Civil Practice Act (OCGA § 9-11-52 (Code Ann. § 81A-152)).

“The case was tried in the State Court of Fulton County without a jury... The trial court was required to set forth findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Code Ann. § 81A-152 (a) [OCGA § 9-11-52 (a)]. [Cits.] The record shows that findings of fact and conclusions of law were not made, and does not show that they were waived. Accordingly, the case is remanded with direction that the trial court vacate the judgment and prepare, or cause to be prepared, appropriate findings of fact and conclusions of law. [Cits.] ” Forrest v. [220]*220Garner, 164 Ga. App. 396 (298 SE2d 259) (1982). For this reason it is unnecessary to consider appellants’ remaining enumeration of error.

Decided June 29, 1983. Leroy Baldwin, for appellants. Joe Hall, Jr., pro se, Jeralyne Hall, pro se. Thomas E. Prior, Carol V. Clark, for appellee.

Case remanded with direction.

Banke and Carley, JJ., concur.

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

Deen, Presiding Judge.

Appellee brought'a dispossessory proceeding against appellants Joe and Jeralyne Hall on the ground that they were in possession of certain property as tenants and were “holding said house and premises without right, title or interest.” Appellants answered denying the allegations and moved to dismiss for failure of the one ground of relief shown in the affidavit to support an action under OCGA § 44-7-50 (former Code Ann. § 61-301). The writ of possession was granted and on appeal from that judgment appellants enumerate as error the denial of their motion to dismiss and the failure of the trial court to make findings of fact and conclusions of law as required by the Civil Practice Act (OCGA § 9-11-52 (Code Ann. § 81A-152)).

“The case was tried in the State Court of Fulton County without a jury... The trial court was required to set forth findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Code Ann. § 81A-152 (a) [OCGA § 9-11-52 (a)]. [Cits.] The record shows that findings of fact and conclusions of law were not made, and does not show that they were waived. Accordingly, the case is remanded with direction that the trial court vacate the judgment and prepare, or cause to be prepared, appropriate findings of fact and conclusions of law. [Cits.] ” Forrest v. [220]*220Garner, 164 Ga. App. 396 (298 SE2d 259) (1982). For this reason it is unnecessary to consider appellants’ remaining enumeration of error.

Decided June 29, 1983. Leroy Baldwin, for appellants. Joe Hall, Jr., pro se, Jeralyne Hall, pro se. Thomas E. Prior, Carol V. Clark, for appellee.

Case remanded with direction.

Banke and Carley, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

306 S.E.2d 359, 167 Ga. App. 219, 1983 Ga. App. LEXIS 2474, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hall-v-vnb-mortgage-corp-gactapp-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack