Hardware Mutual Casualty Company v. Dooley

20 S.E.2d 420, 193 Ga. 882, 1942 Ga. LEXIS 499
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedMay 21, 1942
Docket14043.
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 20 S.E.2d 420 (Hardware Mutual Casualty Company v. Dooley) 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
Hardware Mutual Casualty Company v. Dooley, 20 S.E.2d 420, 193 Ga. 882, 1942 Ga. LEXIS 499 (Ga. 1942).

Opinion

Atkinson, Presiding Justice.

1. “Trusts of every kind, not generally cognizable at law, are peculiarly subjects of equity jurisdiction.” Code, § 108-117. Under tiis law the trustee is amenable to the court of equity for faithful administration of trust. Johns v. Johns, 23 Ga. 31; Dill v. McGehee, 34 Ga. 438.

2. “Any person having a claim against any trust estate for services rendered to said estate, or for articles or property or money furnished for the use of said estate, or any claim for the payment of which a court of equity would render said estate liable, may collect and enforce the payment of such claim in a court of law.” Code, § 108-501.

3. The plaintiff’s demand in the instant case relates not to faithful administration of a trust; but on the allegations and prayers of the petition it is a demand at law for a money judgment.

4. “Eraud renders contracts voidable at the election of the injured party.” Code, § 20-502. In an action at law founded on breach of contract, the *883 defendant may attack the contract in a court of law on the ground that it was procured by fraud. Barrie v. Miller, 104 Ga. 312, 315 (30 S. E. 840, 69 Am. St. R. 171).

No. 14043. May 21, 1942.

5. Under application of the principles stated above, the bill of exceptions in the instant ease was properly returnable to the Court of Appeals, which has jurisdiction of the case. The Supreme Court has not jurisdiction.

Transferred to the Court of Appeals.

All the Justices concur. *884 W. Neal Bawd and Neely, Marshall & Greene, for plaintiff in error. J. Wightman Bowden and John R. Strother, contra.

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

Related

Durham v. Durham
728 S.E.2d 627 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2012)
American Food Services, Inc. v. Goldsmith
175 S.E.2d 57 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1970)
Salter v. Salter
70 S.E.2d 453 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1952)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
20 S.E.2d 420, 193 Ga. 882, 1942 Ga. LEXIS 499, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hardware-mutual-casualty-company-v-dooley-ga-1942.