Silverman v. Morton Gruber & Associates

Supreme Court of Georgia

Silverman v. Morton Gruber & Associates

260 S.E.2d 92, 244 Ga. 396, 1979 Ga. LEXIS 1249

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 27, 1979

Docket34938

StatusPublished

This text of 260 S.E.2d 92 (Silverman v. Morton Gruber & Associates) 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

Silverman v. Morton Gruber & Associates, 260 S.E.2d 92, 244 Ga. 396, 1979 Ga. LEXIS 1249 (Ga. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

Marshall, Justice.

This is a suit by a judgment creditor of one of the defendants to set aside two conveyances of real property. One of the conveyances is to the judgment debtor’s brother and the other conveyance is to the judgment debtor’s father-in-law, both of whom have been named defendants herein. The plaintiffs allegation is that the conveyances are fraudulent in law against creditors under Code § 28-201(2). The trial judge agreed and entered judgment in favor of the plaintiff. The defendants appeal. We affirm.

The evidence presented to the trial judge was ample to authorize him in ruling that the conveyances are subject to being set aside under Code § 28-201(2). See McLendon v. Reynolds Grocery Co., 160 Ga. 763 (129 SE 65) (1925).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Marshall, Justice.

This is a suit by a judgment creditor of one of the defendants to set aside two conveyances of real property. One of the conveyances is to the judgment debtor’s brother and the other conveyance is to the judgment debtor’s father-in-law, both of whom have been named defendants herein. The plaintiffs allegation is that the conveyances are fraudulent in law against creditors under Code § 28-201(2). The trial judge agreed and entered judgment in favor of the plaintiff. The defendants appeal. We affirm.

The evidence presented to the trial judge was ample to authorize him in ruling that the conveyances are subject to being set aside under Code § 28-201(2). See McLendon v. Reynolds Grocery Co., 160 Ga. 763 (129 SE 65) (1925).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

260 S.E.2d 92, 244 Ga. 396, 1979 Ga. LEXIS 1249, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/silverman-v-morton-gruber-associates-ga-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack