Harris v. Usry
77 Ga. 426
This text of 77 Ga. 426 (Harris v. Usry) 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
Harris v. Usry, 77 Ga. 426 (Ga. 1886).
Opinion
One objection made to this mortgage foreclosure by the claimant is sufficient, without more, to make the affirmance of the judgment necessary. The principal and interest are not separated therein. Code, §3570 ; Acts of 1814, p. 393; 6 Ga. 303.
Otherwise the judgment of foreclosure would draw interest on interest, and thus compound the interest.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Moore v. Wachovia Mortgage Co.
226 S.E.2d 812 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1976)
Sirmans v. Citizens & Southern National Bank
199 S.E.2d 894 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1973)
Dampier v. Citizens & Southern National Bank
199 S.E.2d 330 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1973)
Colter v. Consolidated Credit Corp.
154 S.E.2d 713 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1967)
McDonald v. G. A. C. Finance Corp.
154 S.E.2d 825 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1967)
Sewell v. Peoples Loan & Finance Co.
118 S.E.2d 722 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1961)
Bank of Tupelo v. Collier
15 S.E.2d 499 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1941)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
77 Ga. 426, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harris-v-usry-ga-1886.