Youngblood v. Hollis

187 S.E. 863, 183 Ga. 206, 1936 Ga. LEXIS 200
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedOctober 14, 1936
DocketNo. 11512
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 187 S.E. 863 (Youngblood v. Hollis) 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
Youngblood v. Hollis, 187 S.E. 863, 183 Ga. 206, 1936 Ga. LEXIS 200 (Ga. 1936).

Opinion

Gilbert, Justice.

This was. an action for land, which resulted in a verdict for the plaintiff. The defendants moved for a new trial on the general and two special grounds. It is admitted by movants '(plaintiff's in error) that only two issues are raised. One is whether or not, after application for a year’s support and return of the appraisers and order [207]*207of the ordinary to admit the same to record, but no record being actually made, it was within the power of the ordinary succeeding him to record the papers, on request of counsel for the applicant for year’s support, after a lapse of ten years. The other issue is whether the court erred in ruling out testimony of the applicant for year’s support, that before the return of the appraisers she orally stated to the ordinary that she desired to withdraw her application for year’s support and did.not want the year’s support set aside. Held:

No. 11512. October 14, 1936. G. W. Foy, for plaintiff in error. Homer Beeland and G. O. Robinson, contra.

1. The time when the return of the appraisers was recorded is immaterial. Vaughn v. Fitzgerald, 112 Ga. 517 (37 S. E. 752). The cases of Selph v. Selph, 133 Ga. 409 (65 S. E. 881), and Watson v. Watson, 143 Ga. 425 (85 S. E. 324), are not in conflict.

2. The court properly refused to admit testimony to the effect that the applicant for year’s support undertook to withdraw it. Records can not be disputed by parol evidence; and moreover, the applicant dealt with the property as if it had been awarded to her as a year’s support.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Atkinson, J., absent because of illness.

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

Related

Bank of Waynesboro v. Graham
138 S.E.2d 693 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1964)
Jones v. Federal Land Bank of Columbia
6 S.E.2d 52 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1939)
Smith v. Smith
2 S.E.2d 417 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1939)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
187 S.E. 863, 183 Ga. 206, 1936 Ga. LEXIS 200, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/youngblood-v-hollis-ga-1936.