Salsbury v. McNure

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Salsbury v. McNure

116 S.E. 666, 30 Ga. App. 81, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 263

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMarch 17, 1923

Docket13818

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 116 S.E. 666 (Salsbury v. McNure) 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

Salsbury v. McNure, 116 S.E. 666, 30 Ga. App. 81, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 263 (Ga. Ct. App. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

Jenkins,- P. J.

The jury found the property subject, in the trial of a claim filed by the sister of the defendant in fi. fa. to property levied upon under the plaintiff’s distress warrant. The sheriff’s return upon the execution showed that the property was [82]*82in the defendants possession at the- time- of levy, and on the trial the claimant assumed the burden ,of proof. íhéré' was' evidence from which the jury were authorized to find that, 'after the alleged sales to the claimant sister, who'resided .about a mile from the defendant, the property remained in his sole possession, that. at various-subsequent, times he exercised dominion, and control over it, and that all but one of the -checks from the defendant to .the claimant, which it is claimed represented the,consideration of the sales in question, were dated about'a month after the dates of the receipts therefor given by the defendant to the claimant. Although. the evidence for the plaintiff in fi. fa., attacking the bona fidés of the' transaction, was'slight, it was nevertheless-sufficient to raise such an issue fo.r the jury; and since the verdict was not without evidence to support it, and the judge has. refused a second grant of a new trial to the claimant; -his judgment can not be disturbed. ■ Judgment affirmed.

Stephens, and Bell, JJ., concur'.

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

Jenkins,- P. J.

The jury found the property subject, in the trial of a claim filed by the sister of the defendant in fi. fa. to property levied upon under the plaintiff’s distress warrant. The sheriff’s return upon the execution showed that the property was [82]*82in the defendants possession at the- time- of levy, and on the trial the claimant assumed the burden ,of proof. íhéré' was' evidence from which the jury were authorized to find that, 'after the alleged sales to the claimant sister, who'resided .about a mile from the defendant, the property remained in his sole possession, that. at various-subsequent, times he exercised dominion, and control over it, and that all but one of the -checks from the defendant to .the claimant, which it is claimed represented the,consideration of the sales in question, were dated about'a month after the dates of the receipts therefor given by the defendant to the claimant. Although. the evidence for the plaintiff in fi. fa., attacking the bona fidés of the' transaction, was'slight, it was nevertheless-sufficient to raise such an issue fo.r the jury; and since the verdict was not without evidence to support it, and the judge has. refused a second grant of a new trial to the claimant; -his judgment can not be disturbed. ■ Judgment affirmed.

Stephens, and Bell, JJ., concur'.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

116 S.E. 666, 30 Ga. App. 81, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 263, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/salsbury-v-mcnure-gactapp-1923.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack