Peachtree Bank & Trust Co. v. Atha

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Peachtree Bank & Trust Co. v. Atha

260 S.E.2d 559, 151 Ga. App. 565, 1979 Ga. App. LEXIS 2640

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedOctober 1, 1979

Docket58150

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 260 S.E.2d 559 (Peachtree Bank & Trust Co. v. Atha) 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

Peachtree Bank & Trust Co. v. Atha, 260 S.E.2d 559, 151 Ga. App. 565, 1979 Ga. App. LEXIS 2640 (Ga. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

Shulman, Judge.

Plaintiff-creditor brought suit to cancel and render null and void a deed to real estate from defendant-husband to his wife (also a defendant) as a fraudulent conveyance under Code Ann. § 28-201 (2). The court entered a directed verdict on behalf of defendants-appellees on the grounds that plaintiff had renewed defendant-husband’s note of indebtedness subsequent to its notice of the defendant-husband’s deed of conveyance to his wife. On appeal, we affirm.

The undisputed evidence produced by plaintiff itself [566]*566showed that plaintiff had knowledge of defendant-husband’s conveyance of the real estate to his wife,prior to the time plaintiff renewed defendant’s loan. It is clear, then, that plaintiff did not rely on defendant-husband’s ownership of the real estate in issue when it subsequently extended him credit. Compare Gentry v. Cowan, McClung & Co., 66 Ga. 720; Gormley v. Askew, 177 Ga. 554 (170 SE 674). This being so, the plaintiff, as a subsequent creditor with notice, could not void the conveyance under § 28-201 (2). Jowers v. High Point Furn. Co., 10 Ga. App. 297 (1) (73 SE 415). The court properly directed the verdict on behalf of the defendants.

Argued July 2, 1979 Decided October 1, 1979. Davies Owens, Catherine G. Lynch, for appellant. Thomas G. Crichton, for appellees.

Judgment affirmed.

Deen, C. J, and Carley, J., concur.

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

Shulman, Judge.

Plaintiff-creditor brought suit to cancel and render null and void a deed to real estate from defendant-husband to his wife (also a defendant) as a fraudulent conveyance under Code Ann. § 28-201 (2). The court entered a directed verdict on behalf of defendants-appellees on the grounds that plaintiff had renewed defendant-husband’s note of indebtedness subsequent to its notice of the defendant-husband’s deed of conveyance to his wife. On appeal, we affirm.

The undisputed evidence produced by plaintiff itself [566]*566showed that plaintiff had knowledge of defendant-husband’s conveyance of the real estate to his wife,prior to the time plaintiff renewed defendant’s loan. It is clear, then, that plaintiff did not rely on defendant-husband’s ownership of the real estate in issue when it subsequently extended him credit. Compare Gentry v. Cowan, McClung & Co., 66 Ga. 720; Gormley v. Askew, 177 Ga. 554 (170 SE 674). This being so, the plaintiff, as a subsequent creditor with notice, could not void the conveyance under § 28-201 (2). Jowers v. High Point Furn. Co., 10 Ga. App. 297 (1) (73 SE 415). The court properly directed the verdict on behalf of the defendants.

Argued July 2, 1979 Decided October 1, 1979. Davies Owens, Catherine G. Lynch, for appellant. Thomas G. Crichton, for appellees.

Judgment affirmed.

Deen, C. J, and Carley, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

260 S.E.2d 559, 151 Ga. App. 565, 1979 Ga. App. LEXIS 2640, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/peachtree-bank-trust-co-v-atha-gactapp-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack