Morgan v. City of LaGrange

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Morgan v. City of LaGrange

121 S.E. 703, 31 Ga. App. 686, 1924 Ga. App. LEXIS 124

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 27, 1924

Docket14317

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 121 S.E. 703 (Morgan v. City of LaGrange) 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

Morgan v. City of LaGrange, 121 S.E. 703, 31 Ga. App. 686, 1924 Ga. App. LEXIS 124 (Ga. Ct. App. 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

Stephens, J.

1. Where real estate has been damaged by an abutting street improvement made by a city, the owner cannot recover any damage for an alleged decrease in the market value of the property where, by reason of the enhanced value of the property because of the improvement, the market value of the property has not been decreased. Moore v. City of Atlanta, 70 Ga. 611 (3); Guess v. Stone Mt. Granite Co., 72, Ga. 320 (5); City of Atlanta v. Word, 78 Ga. 276 (3); Hurt v. City of Atlanta, 100 Ga. 274 (3) (28 S. E. 65).

2. The petition in this case for the recovery of damages because of decrease of the market value of the freehold, the court did not err in charging the law in accordance with the rule announced above.

3. Where the plaintiff is in possession of real estate devised to her under a will whereof she is the sole executrix, the assent of the executrix to the devise. is presumed. Thursby v. Myers, 57 Ga. 155. The question as to the plaintiff’s title to the property alleged co have been damaged, therefore, not being issuable, it was error prejudicial to the plaintiff, who did not prevail in the suit, to submit such issue to the jury, and for this reason a new trial is ordered.

Judgment reversed.

Jenkins, P. J., and Bell, J., eoneur.

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

Stephens, J.

1. Where real estate has been damaged by an abutting street improvement made by a city, the owner cannot recover any damage for an alleged decrease in the market value of the property where, by reason of the enhanced value of the property because of the improvement, the market value of the property has not been decreased. Moore v. City of Atlanta, 70 Ga. 611 (3); Guess v. Stone Mt. Granite Co., 72, Ga. 320 (5); City of Atlanta v. Word, 78 Ga. 276 (3); Hurt v. City of Atlanta, 100 Ga. 274 (3) (28 S. E. 65).

2. The petition in this case for the recovery of damages because of decrease of the market value of the freehold, the court did not err in charging the law in accordance with the rule announced above.

3. Where the plaintiff is in possession of real estate devised to her under a will whereof she is the sole executrix, the assent of the executrix to the devise. is presumed. Thursby v. Myers, 57 Ga. 155. The question as to the plaintiff’s title to the property alleged co have been damaged, therefore, not being issuable, it was error prejudicial to the plaintiff, who did not prevail in the suit, to submit such issue to the jury, and for this reason a new trial is ordered.

Judgment reversed.

Jenkins, P. J., and Bell, J., eoneur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

121 S.E. 703, 31 Ga. App. 686, 1924 Ga. App. LEXIS 124, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morgan-v-city-of-lagrange-gactapp-1924.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack