lawskills
Loading
Did you know you can download our entire database for free?


Resources
[more] 

Georgia Caselaw:
Browse
Greatest Hits

Georgia Code: Browse

(external) Findlaw Georgia Law Resources


This site exists because of donors like you.

Thanks!


Lawskills.com Georgia Caselaw
DRURY et al. v. DRURY.
17174.
ATKINSON, Presiding Justice.
Complaint for land. Before Judge Walter Thomas. Brantley Superior Court. April 22, 1950.
1. In a suit respecting title to land, where a grantor executes a deed wherein the description as to the north and west boundary is definite and unambiguous, and the grantee enters into possession, subsequent declarations, either express or implied, of the grantor, since deceased, that the lines are other than as stated in the deed, are not admissible. Miller v. Rackley, 199 Ga. 370 (1) (34 S. E. 2d, 438).
2. It was not error to exclude from the evidence the proceedings for a year's support from the estate of the fat lie of the defendants. The proceedings sought to be introduced merely stated that a 1000-acre tract of land was set aside as a year's support, and do not show any return of appraisers setting aside this tract of land as a year's support; but, on the contract, show that the appraisers set aside 1217 acres of described land on another lot. Furthermore, there was nothing to indicate that the 1000 acres of land were any part of the land in dispute. Deal v. George, 146 Ga. 439 (91 S. E. 407).
3. The trial judge did not err in directing a verdict for the plaintiff.
H. B. Drury filed a suit for trespass and injunction against Maurice Drury and others, who were children of his brother, S. C. M. Drury. On June 24, 1909, H. B. Drury acquired title from S. C. M. Drury to 200 acres of land known as the "old Hagan Place." The issue here relates to 34 acres in the northwest corner of this tract. H. B. Drury introduced his deed, recorded June 16, 1909, and testified that he had lived there and been in possession of the entire tract since it was purchased. The deed described the north boundary as "lands of Mrs. Rosa C. Fahm and lands belonging to the estate of McCool," and the west boundary as "Public Road leading from the direction of Waynesville to Bamboo, . . . and lands of J. D. Sparks." As to the northwest corner of the Hagan Place, there was testimony by a surveyor that the Waynesville and Bamboo Road was a well-marked and established road, and that the north line, which was bounded by the McCool property, was pointed out to him by some of the defendants and was a marked line. A plat of the 200-acre Hagan Place, prepared by the surveyor, was introduced, and the surveyor and others testified that the 34-acre tract in dispute was a part of the Hagan Place.
The defendants introduced: a deed, dated in 1911, from Samuel M. Drury to S. M. C. Drury, asserting that the property had been purchased and paid for in 1899, but no deed had been executed, and describing 1000 acres known as lot number 45 of the Williams Survey, which land was originally granted by the State to James Crenshaw; and a deed, dated in 1947, from the mother of the defendants, Mrs. Nevada Drury, to the defendants to 1000 acres known as lot number 45 of the Williams Survey. To place the title to this property in their mother, they tendered year's support proceedings, which were not allowed in evidence. The defendants also introduced certain lease contracts, executed by the plaintiff to various parties, wherein he described the western boundary of his property as lands of S. C. M. Drury.
The trial judge directed a verdict for the plaintiff. An amended motion for new trial was overruled.
Blalock & Blalock, contra.
Hubert F. Rawls and W. A. Wood, for plaintiffs in error.
DECIDED JULY 12, 1950.
Saturday May 23 05:54 EDT


This site exists because of donors like you.

Thanks!


Valid HTML 4.0!

Valid CSS!





Home - Tour - Disclaimer - Privacy - Contact Us
Copyright © 2000,2002,2004 Lawskills.com