Smith v. Johnson

Supreme Court of Georgia

Smith v. Johnson

103 S.E. 417, 150 Ga. 113, 1920 Ga. LEXIS 67

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedApril 15, 1920

DocketNo. 1584

StatusPublished

This text of 103 S.E. 417 (Smith v. Johnson) 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

Smith v. Johnson, 103 S.E. 417, 150 Ga. 113, 1920 Ga. LEXIS 67 (Ga. 1920).

Pincite

Opinion

Atkinson, J.

The judge did not err, on conflicting evidence, in appointing a receiver as prayed. Vizard v. Moody, 117 Ga. 67 (43 S. E. 426); Hunter v. Bowen, 137 Ga. 258 (2), 261 (73 S. E. 380).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Gilbert, J., absent for providential cause.

The defendants admitted that John Smith made a contract for the purchase of the land, but alleged that this was rescinded in July or August, 1912; that Nora Smith “assumed the liability for said land/’ paying the $99, and Johnson executed and delivered to her a bond for title; and that thereafter John Smith had no interest in the property. They denied the allegations of waste, etc. The testimony on the material issues was in conflict.

M. B. Bubanlcs, for plaintiffs in error. Q. I. Carey, contra.

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