Ward v. McDonald

69 S.E. 817, 135 Ga. 515, 1910 Ga. LEXIS 17
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedDecember 15, 1910
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 69 S.E. 817 (Ward v. McDonald) 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
Ward v. McDonald, 69 S.E. 817, 135 Ga. 515, 1910 Ga. LEXIS 17 (Ga. 1910).

Opinion

Beck, J.

1. Under the law of this State a temporary administrator can not institute and maintain an action for the recovery of land held adversely to the estate. Banks v. Walker, 112 Ga. 542 (37 S. E. 866).

[516]*516December 15, 1910. Equitable petition. Before Judge Seabrook. Liberty superior court. September 20, 1909. P. W. Meldrim and Edwin A. Cohen, for plaintiff in error. A. S. Way and James R. Thomas, contra.

2. Where a temporary administrator brought suit, alleging in his petition that the defendant was in possession of a certain tract of land and claimed to be the owner thereof under and by virtue of a sheriff’s deed, and alleging that said' deed was invalid because of accident and mistake on the part of the sheriff who executed the same, and that this mistake was known by the purchaser at the time of tendering the defendant-the purchase-money paid by him, and praying that the latter be required to account to petitioner for rents, issues, and profits which he had received from the lands, and that title to the land be decreed to be in petitioner as administrator, such an. action fell within the ruling made in the decision of this court above referred to, and could not be instituted or maintained by a temporary administrator.

3. The temporary administrator being without authority to institute such an action, the petition could not be amended by substituting the name of one who sued as permanent administrator and who was appointed such after the commencement of the action, although the person who brought the suit as temporary administrator was the same person who was after-wards made permanent administrator.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Related

Peyton v. Rylee
57 S.E.2d 565 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1950)
Auld v. Schmelz
39 S.E.2d 39 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1946)
Furr v. Jordan
27 S.E.2d 861 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1943)
Carmichael v. Mobley
178 S.E. 418 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1935)
Grooms v. Mixon
103 S.E. 845 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1920)
Buchan v. Williamson
82 S.E. 548 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1914)
Chattanooga & Chicamauga Interurban Railway Co. v. Morrison
79 S.E. 903 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1913)
Fuller v. Wood
72 S.E. 504 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1911)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
69 S.E. 817, 135 Ga. 515, 1910 Ga. LEXIS 17, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ward-v-mcdonald-ga-1910.