Steininger v. Williams

63 Ga. 475
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedSeptember 15, 1879
StatusPublished
Cited by19 cases

This text of 63 Ga. 475 (Steininger v. Williams) 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
Steininger v. Williams, 63 Ga. 475 (Ga. 1879).

Opinion

Jackson, Justice.

1. The contract for the rent of the place was made on-the 25th of December, 1875, for the year 1876, and it is-insisted that it is within the statute of frauds, and must be in writing. We think that the Code controls it now, whatever may have been the rule before, as laid down in 31 Ga., 507; for section 2280 of the Code declares that “contracts creating the relation of landlord and tenant for anytime, not exceeding one year, may be by parol.”

2. Besides, Steininger was in possession under the contract two months, and paid rent thereon, according to-plaintiffs evidence, and therefore the contract was executed. Code, §1951. It was part performance, and to break it would operate to the injury of plaintiff, depriving her of opportunity to rent. Code, §1951; 53 Ga., 98 ; 55 198.

3. The main question was for the jury, and they have-decided it. It is, was there actually a contract for rent, or a mere promise to contract at a future day? If the former,, the remedy by distress is good ; if the latter,.there should have been a suit for damages for the deceit or failure to-make the contract. In either event, the figure the defendant would make in a court of justice is not to be envied.

The jury found with the plaintiffs version of the contract, that the house was actually rented, there is evidence-to support that finding, the judge who tried the case sustains it, and under our rule we sustain him.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Fields v. Lanier
670 S.E.2d 145 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2008)
Ask Enterprises, Inc. v. Johnson Model Bedding, Inc.
270 S.E.2d 709 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1980)
Blease v. Blease
235 S.E.2d 21 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1977)
Deriso v. Castleberry
42 S.E.2d 356 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1947)
White v. Simplex Radio Co.
3 S.E.2d 890 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1939)
Neely v. Sheppard
196 S.E. 452 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1938)
Roland v. Floyd
185 S.E. 580 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1936)
Butler v. Godley
181 S.E. 494 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1935)
Richards v. Plaza Hotel Inc.
156 S.E. 809 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1931)
Baxley Hardware Co. v. Morris
140 S.E. 869 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1927)
Render v. Harris
103 S.E. 179 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1920)
Woodard v. Stamos & Stratos
100 S.E. 232 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1919)
Ridgway v. Bryant
70 S.E. 28 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1911)
Turner v. Trail
1909 OK 205 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1909)
Paulton v. Kreiser
101 N.W. 46 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1904)
Wickson v. Monarch Cycle Manufacturing Co.
60 P. 764 (California Supreme Court, 1900)
Higgins v. Gager
47 S.W. 848 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1898)
Greenlees v. Roche
48 Kan. 503 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1892)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
63 Ga. 475, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/steininger-v-williams-ga-1879.