Mosely v. Evans

141 S.E. 207, 165 Ga. 472, 1928 Ga. LEXIS 13
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedJanuary 12, 1928
DocketNo. 5943
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 141 S.E. 207 (Mosely v. Evans) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Mosely v. Evans, 141 S.E. 207, 165 Ga. 472, 1928 Ga. LEXIS 13 (Ga. 1928).

Opinion

Russell, C. J.

Abe Evans and H. M. Cobb filed a petition for injunction and damages against W. S. Mosely, alleging that they were the holders of a perfect fee-simple title to a tract of land in Tattnall County, described in the petition; that Mosely is working the timber thereon for turpentine, and refuses to discontinue his operations; that he has no title or valid claim to the timber, although he has informed the petitioners that he is proceeding on a lease made to him by Lonnie Kennedy in December, 1925; that the damages are irreparable; and that the petitioners are without any adequate remedy at law. Upon presentation of the petition the judge of the superior court issued a rule nisi and a temporary order restraining the defendant Mosely from “dipping the gum from, raking or weeding around, or in any otherwise working the timber mentioned in this petition.” This order contained a provision that “the hearing be had by affidavits and such documentary evidence as parties desire to offer.” At the appointed time for hearing both sides announced ready without any affidavits, but the petition 'and answer, both of which were verified, were submitted as evidence, as well as a deed from J. Henry Kennedy, sheriff, to Bank of Collins, dated December 7, 1926, and recorded December 8, 1926; a deed from the Bank of Collins to the petitioners, Abe Evans and H. M. Cobb, executed December 28, 1926, and recorded December 30, 1926; and a fi. fa. in favor of the First National Bank of Vidalia against Lonnie Kennedy et al., dated March 29, 1922, and recorded on the general execution docket of Tattnall County on July 1, 1922, for $1250, besides interest and costs, which execution was levied upon the land in [474]*474question on October 7, 1925, and sale under said levy was made on December 7, 1926. In his answer the defendant says that petitioners do not hold a fee-simple title to the land or the timber, because they did not get a deed until December 28, 1926, and defendant claims only a leasehold right in the turpentine privileges for three years from December 10, 1926, on which date he bought a four-year lease of the turpentine timber for $600, which was recorded on the same day in the office of the clerk of the superior court. The $600 represented $150 per year, and defendant has used it but one year and has $450 invested in the use of said timber for three years; and this was purchased from Lonnie Kennedy when he owned said place, was in possession thereof, was living on it, and had a right to sell.

The defendant by way of further plea alleges: (1) The Bank of Collins bought the land for $1750, which paid the oldest judgment against Lonnie Kennedy, which was the one in favor of the First National Bank of Vidalia, and left a balance of $93.65 and the same was paid over by the Bank of Collins to the Bank of. Reidsville on an execution that was not recorded in said county until December 1, 1926. The lease taken by defendant was on record about one year before the record of the fi. fa. of the Bank of Reidsville; the total amount, in round numbers, of the judgment of the Bank of Reidsville was $1000 on the day the land was sold; the Bank of Collins had a judgment against Lonnie Kennedy that was put on record November 24, 1925, for approximately $1000; since the sale of said land the Bank of Collins has paid in full to the Bank of Reidsville its judgment against Lonnie Kennedy, and has also paid in full its own judgment against Lonnie Kennedy, and has paid Lonnie Kennedy $317 beyond these payments as the balance of the purchase'-price of said land. The $4650 alleged to have been paid by the plaintiffs to the Bank of Collins is the amount the Bank of Collins paid Lonnie Kennedy for said place. Defendant charges that there was an understanding between the Bank of Collins and Lonnie Kennedy that the bank would buy the place as cheaply as possible, but would malee it pay the three judgment creditors and then as much over for him as they could ;■ and that the plaintiffs to this suit knew of this agreement. At the time he took his lease of the turpentine timber there were but two liens against said land, the one in favor of the First [475]*475National Bank of Vidalia and the one in favor of the Bank of Collins. The place has been sold since then, and both of said liens were paid off in full by the purchaser of said place; and therefore the lease is now certainly good. “No one can dispute that the legal and equitable title to said land was in Lonnie Kennedy the day he made said lease, and said land had only two execution liens against it, and both of them have been paid in full. If the plaintiffs were not a party to the deal between the Bank of Collins and Lonnie Kennedy, then they had constructive and legal notice of the lease of the defendant, for the same had been on record for more than a year before they bought said place. If they did have knowledge of this deal referred to above, then they are bound by the same; and they can not say that they bought said place with knowledge that said lease was not good because the sale of the place had not paid the liens on said place at the time the lease was made. The party from whom the plaintiffs bought this land is entirely solvent, and it warranted the title to the plaintiffs, and they should look to it for their damages if they have any.” (2) For further plea the defendant says that the plaintiffs have a remedy at law to sue the Bank of Collins on its warranty to them, or to sue the defendant for damages, and said damages are not irreparable. The value of the trees the defendant is to work for the next three years is capable of computation, and he is amply able to respond in damages. (3) For the reasons just set out, and for the equity and justice of the matter, he ought to be allowed to give such bond as the court may require, and go on and work the boxes; and he offers to give such bond. He prays that the Bank of Collins be made a party defendant and required to answer under oath just what its trade and agreement was with Lonnie Kennedy and the plaintiffs. In addition to liis sworn answer the defendant introduced in evidence a turpentine lease made to him by Lonnie Kennedy on December 5, 1925, and recorded on the same day, conveying to defendant all the turpentine privileges on the land in question, for a period of four years.

After argument for both parties, counsel for the petitioners asked the court for time to get up affidavits in reply to the defendant’s answer, which time was granted. A week later counsel for the petitioners notified counsel for the defendant that more time had [476]*476been asked in which to amend the petition and set up an abstract of title, and that the court had granted more time for that purpose; it being stated in the bill of exceptions that “counsel for defendant had no opportunity to object to the second continuance.” Thereafter petitioners presented to the court an amendment with an abstract of title attached, and set forth the additional allegations that the action of the defendant, unless restrained, would constitute a continuing trespass, giving rise to a multiplicity of suits; that the trees worked for turpentine would be thereby weakened and rendered more susceptible to deterioration and destruction by storms and worms, which damage would be impossible of computation and therefore irreparable.

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

Related

Glinton v. AND R, INC.
524 S.E.2d 481 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
141 S.E. 207, 165 Ga. 472, 1928 Ga. LEXIS 13, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mosely-v-evans-ga-1928.