Lanier v. Dyer

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Lanier v. Dyer

145 S.E.2d 621, 112 Ga. App. 558, 1965 Ga. App. LEXIS 770

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedOctober 15, 1965

Docket41558

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 145 S.E.2d 621 (Lanier v. Dyer) 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

Lanier v. Dyer, 145 S.E.2d 621, 112 Ga. App. 558, 1965 Ga. App. LEXIS 770 (Ga. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Eberhardt, Judge.

1. (a) Where the grantor, or his privy, in a security deed remains in possession of the premises after lawful foreclosure of the deed, he is a tenant at sufferance and is subject to be summarily dispossessed by the purchaser at the foreclosure sale, or by his privy. Price v. Bloodworth, 55 Ga. App. 268 (189 SE 925).

(b) Where the person in possession is a son of the deceased grantor in the security deed, whether claiming as an heir at law or as a devisee under the grantor’s will, he is subject to summary dispossession to the same extent and in the same manner as would have been the grantor had she lived and remained in possession. Nor does it matter that the proceeding is brought by one who is also an heir at law of the grantor and, but for the foreclosure, a tenant in common with the defendant.

2. These facts appearing from the pleadings and from affidavits submitted in support of a motion for summary judgment, the grant of the motion was proper.

Judgment affirmed.

Nichols, P. J., and Pannell, J., concur. *559 John B. Calhoun, for plaintiff in error. Sullivan, Herndon & Smith, Bichard H. Herndon, contra.

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