McFarland v. Lee

Court of Appeals of Georgia

McFarland v. Lee

73 S.E. 1091, 10 Ga. App. 698, 1912 Ga. App. LEXIS 650

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMarch 6, 1912

Docket3762

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 73 S.E. 1091 (McFarland v. Lee) 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

McFarland v. Lee, 73 S.E. 1091, 10 Ga. App. 698, 1912 Ga. App. LEXIS 650 (Ga. Ct. App. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

Pottle, J.

1. Exception to a judgment refusing to allow an amendment to an answer can not properly be made in a motion for a new trial.

2. In a suit upon a forthcoming' bond, the only question to be decided is whether or not there has been a breach of the bond. No issue can properly be raised as to the title of the property involved. Rowland v. Page, 4 Ga. App. 269 (61 S. E. 148).

3. The evidence authorized a finding' that no claim had been interposed. This being so, the bond sued upon and which was given as the foundation of a claim is to be treated as a voluntary obligation. A recital in the bond that the principal obligor claims the property is not evidence that a claim has actually been interposed, but only that the obligor intended to interpose a claim. Jones v. Kendrick, 94 Ga. 645 (21 S. E. 831).

4. The evidence authorized a verdict that there had been a breach of the bond by ,the defendant. Judgment affirmed.

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