Scott-Strother Lumber Co. v. Danner

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Scott-Strother Lumber Co. v. Danner

139 S.E. 119, 37 Ga. App. 99, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 488

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJuly 14, 1927

Docket18131

StatusPublished

This text of 139 S.E. 119 (Scott-Strother Lumber Co. v. Danner) 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

Scott-Strother Lumber Co. v. Danner, 139 S.E. 119, 37 Ga. App. 99, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 488 (Ga. Ct. App. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

1. Where a deed conveys “all the pine timber of sawable kind standing on that tract or parcel of land known as a part of the Old Danner place, and bounded as follows: on the north by lands of B. E. Danner Jr., east by lands of B. E. Danner Sr., south same lands, and west by lands of B. G-. Sayer, and containing thirty-eight acres or aboirfc 175,000 feet, more or less, in said tract,” and in the conveyance it is provided that $300 shall be payable at one time' and $575 at a subsequent time, and the sellers sue upon the contract, a defense seeking to apportion an alleged deficiency in the number of feet of timber conveyed must show actual fraud on the part of the grantor. See King Lumber Go. v. Cowart, 136 Ga. 739 (72 S. E. 37), and cit.

(a) In the present case it was admitted, and the court charged the jury, that the sale of the timber was in bulk.

(b) The evidence was in conflict, but the jury were authorized to find that there was no intentional fraud on the part of the vendor.

(c) It was a question for the jury whether there was such gross deficiency in the number of feet estimated to be on the tract of land as to justify the suspicion of wilful deception, or mistake amounting to fraud.

2. The charge of the court was fair, and was not subject to the criticisms urged in the special grounds of the motion for a new trial. There being evidence to authorize the verdict rendered, and the court having approved the verdict, the motion for a new trial was properly overruled.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

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

Luke, J.

1. Where a deed conveys “all the pine timber of sawable kind standing on that tract or parcel of land known as a part of the Old Danner place, and bounded as follows: on the north by lands of B. E. Danner Jr., east by lands of B. E. Danner Sr., south same lands, and west by lands of B. G-. Sayer, and containing thirty-eight acres or aboirfc 175,000 feet, more or less, in said tract,” and in the conveyance it is provided that $300 shall be payable at one time' and $575 at a subsequent time, and the sellers sue upon the contract, a defense seeking to apportion an alleged deficiency in the number of feet of timber conveyed must show actual fraud on the part of the grantor. See King Lumber Go. v. Cowart, 136 Ga. 739 (72 S. E. 37), and cit.

(a) In the present case it was admitted, and the court charged the jury, that the sale of the timber was in bulk.

(b) The evidence was in conflict, but the jury were authorized to find that there was no intentional fraud on the part of the vendor.

(c) It was a question for the jury whether there was such gross deficiency in the number of feet estimated to be on the tract of land as to justify the suspicion of wilful deception, or mistake amounting to fraud.

2. The charge of the court was fair, and was not subject to the criticisms urged in the special grounds of the motion for a new trial. There being evidence to authorize the verdict rendered, and the court having approved the verdict, the motion for a new trial was properly overruled.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

139 S.E. 119, 37 Ga. App. 99, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 488, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scott-strother-lumber-co-v-danner-gactapp-1927.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack