Harley v. Davis

66 S.E. 1102, 7 Ga. App. 386, 1910 Ga. App. LEXIS 305
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedFebruary 10, 1910
Docket2057
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 66 S.E. 1102 (Harley v. Davis) 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
Harley v. Davis, 66 S.E. 1102, 7 Ga. App. 386, 1910 Ga. App. LEXIS 305 (Ga. Ct. App. 1910).

Opinion

Hnx, O. J.

The evidence in this case leaves it doubtful whether the relation between the plaintiff and the defendant was that of landlord and tenant, or landlord and cropper. If the former, the title to the crops made by the tenant on the place rented was in the tenant, subject to the landlord’s lien for rent and supplies. Wadley v. Williams, 75 Ga. 272. Where the relation of landlord and cropper exists, the title to all the crops grown on the rented land remains in the landlord until there has been an actual division and settlement. DeLoach v. Delk, 119 Ga. [387]*387884 (47 S. E. 204). If tlie relation of landlord and tenant existed, the landlord could not bring against the tenant bail-trover for the rent, as the title to the crops was in the tenant. If the relation of landlord and' cropper existed, and there was not an actual division and settlement between the landlord and cropper according' to the terms of the contract, the landlord could bring against the cropper an action of trover to recover the share of the crop belonging to himself and of which the cropper was in possession. A charge which in effect instructed the jury that a division of the crops would prevent the landlord from recovering in an action of trover, although there had been no actual settlement between the landlord and cropper, was erroneous. 'There must be both division and settlement to prevent such action. Civil Code, §§ 3129, 3130, 3131; DeLoach v. Delk, supra. Judgment reversed,.

Trover; from city court of Reidsville — ■ Judge Morgan. June 21, 1909. Submitted November 18, 1909. Decided February 10, 1910. W. T. Burkhalter, for plaintiff.

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

Related

Flynt v. Barrett
36 S.E.2d 868 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1946)
Atlanta Trust Co. v. Oliver-McDonald Co.
136 S.E. 824 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1927)
Collier v. Pritchett
118 S.E. 444 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1923)
Welch v. Lindsey
107 S.E. 891 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1921)
Parks v. Langley
88 S.E. 695 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1916)
Fountain v. Fountain
73 S.E. 1096 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1912)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
66 S.E. 1102, 7 Ga. App. 386, 1910 Ga. App. LEXIS 305, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harley-v-davis-gactapp-1910.