Teel v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Teel v. State

67 S.E. 699, 7 Ga. App. 600, 1910 Ga. App. LEXIS 415

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 6, 1910

Docket2448

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 67 S.E. 699 (Teel v. State) 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

Teel v. State, 67 S.E. 699, 7 Ga. App. 600, 1910 Ga. App. LEXIS 415 (Ga. Ct. App. 1910).

Pincite

Opinion

Powell, J.

1. Where the relation of landlord and tenant exists, the title to crops grown on the rented land is in the tenant, and not in the landlord; the latter has only a lien for his rent.

2. Where the tenant disposes of crops grown on the rented land to the injury of the landlord, the offense is not larceny, but is a violation of a different provision of the Penal Code.

3. The landlord can not acquire title to the crops grown on the rented land simply by taking possession of them. He therefore can not by his own act, without the consent of the tenant, acquire such title to the crops grown on the rented premises as would support an indictment for larceny against the tenant for taking an'd' carrying away the crop. Neal v. Smith, 123 Ga. 26 (50 S. E. 922) ; Hall v. McGaughey, 114 Ga. 405 (40 S. E. 246). ’ Judgment reversed.

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

Powell, J.

1. Where the relation of landlord and tenant exists, the title to crops grown on the rented land is in the tenant, and not in the landlord; the latter has only a lien for his rent.

2. Where the tenant disposes of crops grown on the rented land to the injury of the landlord, the offense is not larceny, but is a violation of a different provision of the Penal Code.

3. The landlord can not acquire title to the crops grown on the rented land simply by taking possession of them. He therefore can not by his own act, without the consent of the tenant, acquire such title to the crops grown on the rented premises as would support an indictment for larceny against the tenant for taking an'd' carrying away the crop. Neal v. Smith, 123 Ga. 26 (50 S. E. 922) ; Hall v. McGaughey, 114 Ga. 405 (40 S. E. 246). ’ Judgment reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

67 S.E. 699, 7 Ga. App. 600, 1910 Ga. App. LEXIS 415, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/teel-v-state-gactapp-1910.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack