Jonas & Co. v. Tinsley

Supreme Court of Georgia

Jonas & Co. v. Tinsley

185 S.E. 291, 182 Ga. 298, 1936 Ga. LEXIS 337

Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided March 31, 1936·No. No. 10915·Published

Opinion

Atkinson, Justice.

1. The sale of the realty in pursuance of the powers expressed in the security deed was not void for any reason assigned.

2. The evidence authorized the finding of the judge, to whom the case was submitted for decision without a jury, in favor of the intervenors. The court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial, based on the general grounds. Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. Wright & Covington, and David J. Meyerhardt, for plaintiffs. J. Q. B. Erwin and Maddox, Matthews Oioens, for defendants.

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

Atkinson, Justice.

1. The sale of the realty in pursuance of the powers expressed in the security deed was not void for any reason assigned.

2. The evidence authorized the finding of the judge, to whom the case was submitted for decision without a jury, in favor of the intervenors. The court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial, based on the general grounds. Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. Wright & Covington, and David J. Meyerhardt, for plaintiffs. J. Q. B. Erwin and Maddox, Matthews Oioens, for defendants.

Jonas & Co. v. Tinsley, 185 S.E. 291, 182 Ga. 298, 1936 Ga. LEXIS 337 (Ga. 1936).

Pincite

185 S.E. 291 (Jonas & Co. v. Tinsley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.