Wheeler v. Thomas
This text of 77 S.E. 817 (Wheeler v. Thomas) 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.
Opinion
The remedy afforded by the statute for the processioning of land (Civil Code, § 3818 et seq.) is applicable only to the location of land lines which once were marked or established. It is not available as a proceeding to malee and establish new lines between adjacent landowners, nor as a substitute for an action to try conflicting claims of title to land. Amos v. Parker, 88 Ga. 754 (16 S. E. 200); Crawford v. Wheeler, 111 Ga. 870 (36 S. E. 954); Walker v. Boyer, 121 Ga. 300 (48 S. E. 916). Accordingly, where it was admitted on the trial of the issue formed on a protest to the return of proeessioners that they undertook to mark anew and run a line where there had never been a line of any character, and the evidence disclosed that the real controversy was whether the dividing line between the adjacent landowners was the high-water mark or the thread of a creek, neither of which was shown to have been established as a dividing line, it was not error to dismiss the proceeding for want of jurisdiction of the proeessioners over • the subject-matter.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
77 S.E. 817, 139 Ga. 598, 1913 Ga. LEXIS 532, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wheeler-v-thomas-ga-1913.