Puett v. Strickland

Supreme Court of Georgia

Puett v. Strickland

86 S.E. 547, 144 Ga. 193, 1915 Ga. LEXIS 122

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedOctober 13, 1915

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 86 S.E. 547 (Puett v. Strickland) 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

Puett v. Strickland, 86 S.E. 547, 144 Ga. 193, 1915 Ga. LEXIS 122 (Ga. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

Atkinson, J.

1. A deed to land was duly signed by the grantor and attesting witnesses, and was handed by the grantor to the clerk of the superior court to be recorded. After the deed was recorded the clerk offered the deed back to the. grantor, who refused to take it, declaring that it belonged to the grantee. The clerk’s term of office soon expired, and his successor, finding the paper in the office, caused it to be handed to the grantee by a third person. Held, that the facts stated show actual delivery of the deed.

(a) It was immaterial whether the grantor died before or after the deed was actually taken from the office of the clerk of the court. O’Neal v. Brown, 67 Ga. 707.

2. In the deed the grantor reserved the right of possession of the property during his life, and in December, before his death, which occurred in January, he rented the property for the ensuing year at a stated price. After executing the deed the grantor executed a will, in the third item of which the rents of the land for five years after his death were' specially devised to the wife of the testator for support of herself and minor children. The grantee brought suit in a justice’s court against the tenant, for rent accruing after the death of the grantor. The tenant instituted a suit in the superior court, to enjoin the action in the justice’s court, and to require the grantee named in the deed and the testa-' trix under the will to interplead in order that it might be decreed to which of them the rent should be paid. Both filed answers, and on the interlocutory hearing the uneontradicted evidence was to the effect as indicated in the preceding note. Held, that the grantee’s estate under the deed was vested, and the right of possession accrued at the death of [194]*194the grantor (Kytle v. Kytle, 128 Ga. 387, 57 S. S. 748), and no interest in the rents passed by virtue of the will.

October 13, 1915.

Injunction. Before Judge Patterson. Forsyth superior court. April 17, 1915.

Gober & Jaclcson and Henry N. Kirby, for plaintiff in error. F. Theo. Wills and J. P. Brooke, contra.

3. It was erroneous to enjoin the grantee’s suit to recover the rents.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Atkinson, J.

1. A deed to land was duly signed by the grantor and attesting witnesses, and was handed by the grantor to the clerk of the superior court to be recorded. After the deed was recorded the clerk offered the deed back to the. grantor, who refused to take it, declaring that it belonged to the grantee. The clerk’s term of office soon expired, and his successor, finding the paper in the office, caused it to be handed to the grantee by a third person. Held, that the facts stated show actual delivery of the deed.

(a) It was immaterial whether the grantor died before or after the deed was actually taken from the office of the clerk of the court. O’Neal v. Brown, 67 Ga. 707.

2. In the deed the grantor reserved the right of possession of the property during his life, and in December, before his death, which occurred in January, he rented the property for the ensuing year at a stated price. After executing the deed the grantor executed a will, in the third item of which the rents of the land for five years after his death were' specially devised to the wife of the testator for support of herself and minor children. The grantee brought suit in a justice’s court against the tenant, for rent accruing after the death of the grantor. The tenant instituted a suit in the superior court, to enjoin the action in the justice’s court, and to require the grantee named in the deed and the testa-' trix under the will to interplead in order that it might be decreed to which of them the rent should be paid. Both filed answers, and on the interlocutory hearing the uneontradicted evidence was to the effect as indicated in the preceding note. Held, that the grantee’s estate under the deed was vested, and the right of possession accrued at the death of [194]*194the grantor (Kytle v. Kytle, 128 Ga. 387, 57 S. S. 748), and no interest in the rents passed by virtue of the will.

October 13, 1915.

Injunction. Before Judge Patterson. Forsyth superior court. April 17, 1915.

Gober & Jaclcson and Henry N. Kirby, for plaintiff in error. F. Theo. Wills and J. P. Brooke, contra.

3. It was erroneous to enjoin the grantee’s suit to recover the rents.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

86 S.E. 547, 144 Ga. 193, 1915 Ga. LEXIS 122, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/puett-v-strickland-ga-1915.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack