Jackson & Bros. v. Mowry

30 Ga. 143
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided March 15, 1860·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

[146] By the Court.

Lumpkin, J.,

delivering the opinion.

The action for use and occupation will not lie in this case.

It is argued, that in order to maintain this action, two things only are necessary to be proven, to-wit: Title in the plaintiff and possession by defendant. And while it is true that a contract to pay rent may be implied from these data, yet, if it shall affirmatively appear, as it does in this case, that the tenant disclaims holding under the plaintiffs, no such presumption can arise.

It would be absurd to imply that A agrees to pay B rent for the land he lives on, when A most stoutly denies it is B’s land. And such, we understand, is the well-settled doctrine of the books upon this subject; and in conformity thereto have been the rulings of this Court.

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

Jackson & Bros. v. Mowry, 30 Ga. 143 (Ga. 1860).

30 Ga. 143 (Jackson & Bros. v. Mowry) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Stephens v. Pickering
15 S.E.2d 202 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1941)
Cleveland v. Watson
179 S.E. 586 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1935)
Roberts v. Roberts
148 S.E. 606 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1929)
Illinois Steel Co. v. Budzisz
119 N.W. 935 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1909)
Lathrop v. Standard Oil Co.
9 S.E. 1041 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1889)