Harman v. Stange

62 Ga. 167
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedAugust 15, 1878
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 62 Ga. 167 (Harman v. Stange) 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
Harman v. Stange, 62 Ga. 167 (Ga. 1878).

Opinion

A motion was made to dismiss the bill of exceptions in this case on the ground that the deeds which were attached to the bill of exceptions were not referred to therein, were attached after and separate from the judge’s certificate, and in nowise identified as exhibits to the bill, in accordance with the 10th rule of this court. These deeds, whether they constitute a mortgate or absolute title, and especially in view of the transfer or assignment upon one of them by certain administrators of one estate to those of another, are absolutely necessary in order to pass an intelligent judgment in reviewing the decision complained of; and we cannot tell whether they were in evidence or not, or what sort of deeds they were, without the certificate of the judge or some other act of his identifying them. The motion to dismiss must therefore be sustained. See Taylor vs. Cook et al., 51 Qa., 215. We are the less reluctant to dismiss the case, because if he acted upon the evidence as contained in the bill of exceptions certified [168]*168to, we should be constrained to affirm the judgment under the ruling in Kinnébrew vs. McWhorter et al., decided at this term. For, conceding that this evidence makes the transaction only an equitable mortgage — that is, that there was an absolute deed with bond to reconvey on payment of money borrowed — then the widow cannot get dower until she has paid, or offered to pay, the principal sum borrowed, with interest thereon. So that, as she has not complied with this rule so laid down in Kinnébrew vs. McWhorter et al., the judgment would have been affirmed; and the dismissing the bill only has the same effect.

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

Related

McKenzie v. State
33 S.E.2d 539 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1945)
Fairburn Banking Co. v. Citizens Bank
93 S.E. 234 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1917)
Roberts v. City of Cairo
66 S.E. 938 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1909)
McDonald v. McDonald
47 S.E. 918 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1904)
Ferris v. Van Ingen & Co.
110 Ga. 102 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1899)
Chism v. Varnedoe
22 S.E. 334 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1895)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
62 Ga. 167, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harman-v-stange-ga-1878.