Hartsfield Company Inc. v. White

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Hartsfield Company Inc. v. White

7 S.E.2d 286, 61 Ga. App. 703, 1940 Ga. App. LEXIS 227

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 15, 1940

Docket27995.

StatusPublished

This text of 7 S.E.2d 286 (Hartsfield Company Inc. v. White) 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

Hartsfield Company Inc. v. White, 7 S.E.2d 286, 61 Ga. App. 703, 1940 Ga. App. LEXIS 227 (Ga. Ct. App. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

Sutton, J.

In the present ease where the plantiff brought an action of trover for certain household goods in the possession of the defendant husband and wife, and which by the deceased father of the defendant wife had been conveyed by bill of sale to the plaintiff as security for a loan, which was past due and unpaid, the jury was authorized to find from the evidence that title thereto was not in the grantor in the secur *704 ity deed but in the defendant wife, in that, prior to the loan and execution of the bill of sale, she had purchased from others part of the goods with her own funds, and the rest, which had been the property of her deceased mother, had been given to her by her mother prior to the latter’s death. The grounds of the motion for new trial assigning error on the admission of certain evidence are without merit. The appellate division of the civil court of Fulton County properly affirmed the judgment of the trial court overruling the plaintiff’s motion for new trial.

Decided February 15, 1940. Robert T. Efurd, Mose 8. Hayes, for plaintiff. E. Harold Sheais, for defendants.

Judgment affirmed.

Stephens, P. J., and Felton, J., concur.

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

Sutton, J.

In the present ease where the plantiff brought an action of trover for certain household goods in the possession of the defendant husband and wife, and which by the deceased father of the defendant wife had been conveyed by bill of sale to the plaintiff as security for a loan, which was past due and unpaid, the jury was authorized to find from the evidence that title thereto was not in the grantor in the secur *704 ity deed but in the defendant wife, in that, prior to the loan and execution of the bill of sale, she had purchased from others part of the goods with her own funds, and the rest, which had been the property of her deceased mother, had been given to her by her mother prior to the latter’s death. The grounds of the motion for new trial assigning error on the admission of certain evidence are without merit. The appellate division of the civil court of Fulton County properly affirmed the judgment of the trial court overruling the plaintiff’s motion for new trial.

Decided February 15, 1940. Robert T. Efurd, Mose 8. Hayes, for plaintiff. E. Harold Sheais, for defendants.

Judgment affirmed.

Stephens, P. J., and Felton, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

7 S.E.2d 286, 61 Ga. App. 703, 1940 Ga. App. LEXIS 227, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hartsfield-company-inc-v-white-gactapp-1940.