B-X Corp. v. Jeter, B-X
| Decision Date | 12 November 1953 |
| Docket Number | B-X,No. 18366,18366 |
| Citation | 210 Ga. 250,78 S.E.2d 790 |
| Parties | CORP. et al. v. JETER. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
1. The title which the purchaser acquires to property in consequence of a tax sale is not a perfect fee-simple title, but an inchoate, qualified, or defeasible estate which terminates by operation of law upon redemption within the time prescribed by the statute.
2. The redemption price which must be paid for tax-sold property is fixed by Code, § 92-8313, and redemption is effected by either payment or tender of the prescribed amount. Tender satisfies the requirement for payment.
3. Where the defendant has acted in bad faith, or has been stubbornly litigious, or has caused the plaintiff unnecessary trouble and expense, in the transaction out of which the cause of action arose, the jury may award attorney's fees as expenses of litigation. The allowance of such fees in this case was amply authorized by the evidence.
4. Assignments of error not insisted upon by counsel in their briefs or otherwise argued in this court will be treated as abandoned. A mere recital in the brief of counsel of the existence of an assignment of error, without argument or citation of authorities in its support, is insufficient to save it from being treated as abandoned. Head v. Lee, 203 Ga. 191(5), 45 S.E.2d 666, and citations.
Wm. G. Grant, Grant, Wiggins, Grizzard & Smith, Atlanta, for plaintiffs in error.
Frank A. Bowers, Atlanta, for defendant in error.
An amended petition, which Luncy Jeter filed on July 18, 1952, against The B-X Corporation and its president, Thomas B. West, made in substance the following case: During 1948 an execution was issued by the tax collector of Fulton County against the plaintiff for State and County taxes amounting to $16.97. It was levied on a house and lot known as No. 946 Simpson Street, N. W., Atlanta, Georgia, having a value of $4,000. The property was sold on July 6, 1949, for the purpose of satisfying the execution and was purchased by and conveyed to the defendant B-X Corporation for $34.65. The original owner, however, remained in possession of the premises. On May 19, 1952, the purchaser by a writing, which Thomas B. West, its president, signed, notified the plaintiff that his right to redeem the property would expire and be forever foreclosed and barred on and after July 19, 1952, and that he could at any time before that date redeem his property by paying to it the redemption price, as fixed and provided by law. Prior to the date upon which his right to redeem expired, the plaintiff offered to pay and tendered to the defendant West, as president of the defendant B-X Corporation, the full amount of money which he was required to pay for the redemption of his property, but acceptance of it was refused. With the filing of his petition, he paid into the registry of the court $70, a sum in excess of the amount required for redemption, and by his petition made a continuing tender of it. It was also alleged in the petition that the defendants had been, with respect to the plaintiff's right to redeem his property, stubbornly litigious; that they had, in the transaction declared on, acted in bad faith; and that they had, in refusing to accept a tender of an amount sufficient to redeem his property, made it necessary for him to incur an unnecessary expense of $500 for legal services. Besides for process and general relief, the prayers were: that the defendants be enjoined, temporarily and permanently, from foreclosing and barring the plaintiff's right of redemption and from exercising any acts of dominion or ownership over the premises involved; that a decree be entered directing cancellation of the tax deed, since it had been fully satisfied by redemption; and that the plaintiff have and recover judgment against the defendants for $2,000 as punitive damages, and $500 as attorney's fees. By way of answer to the petition, it was admitted that the defendant B-X Corporation acquired title to the property involved in consequence of a tax sale, for a consideration of $34.65, and by a conveyance which was executed on July 6, 1949; and that the defendant corporation had in writing notified the plaintiff that his right to redeem the property would be forever foreclosed and barred on and after July 19, 1952. But all other substantial allegations of the petition were denied by the answer. It was stipulated that the plaintiff, with the filing of his petition, paid into the registry of the court $70 as a continuing tender of an amount which he insists was sufficient to effect redemption of his tax-sold property; that the defendants paid the Sheriff of Fulton County $11 as fees legally due him for serving eleven redemption foreclosure notices; and that the defendants paid the Fulton Daily Report Company $10 as a necessary advertising cost for the publication of a redemption foreclosure notice.
On the trial, the testimony for the plaintiff tended to show that, after the redemption foreclosure notice was served, but prior to the day on which the right of redemption expired, the plaintiff personally made two visits to the offices of the defendant corporation for the purpose of redeeming his property, conferring each time while there with the defendant West, his first visit being on July 1 and the other on July 15. On each occasion he carried with him and in his hand at least $100 in cash. West saw the money. He told West on those visits that he wanted a settlement; that he wanted to pay and settle the taxes; that he wanted to pay the taxes which he had taken up on 946 Simpson Street, that he wanted to pay the 'whole thing,' and that he wanted to 'redeem the taxes.' On the occasion of the plaintiff's first visit and in response to his offer to settle and pay the amount due him, West replied, 'I haven't time to fool with you.' West then get his hat and walked out of his office. On the occasion of the plaintiff's second visit and in response to a like statement that he wanted to settle and pay the amount due him, West replied, 'The man you want to see is in New York.' West then, as before, left his office. The plaintiff testified that his home had a fair, reasonable market value of $4,000. Edward L. Smith, a witness for the plaintiff, testified that he made an actual tender of $70 to the defendant West on July 18, 1952, for the plaintiff and for the purpose of redeeming his home, but an acceptance of it was refused by West. George Starr Peck, John I. Kelley, Frank Grizzard, and Saul Blau, as witnesses for the plaintiff, each testified that he was an attorney and a member of the Atlanta Bar; that he had had experience in cases involving titles to land, particulary in cases such as the instant one; and that, in his opinion, a reasonable fee for the preparation, filing, and trial of a case such as the one at bar would be $500. The defendant West, as a witness in his own behalf, gave testimony tending to disprove the allegations of the petition respecting redemption. He denied that he had refused to allow the plaintiff to redeem his property, but...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
University Computing Co. v. Lykes-Youngstown Corp.
...its brief that such an affirmance of Count 3 has this effect.45 Adams v. Cowart, 224 Ga. 210, 160 S.E.2d 805 (1968); B-X Corp. v. Jeter, 210 Ga. 250, 78 S.E.2d 790 (1953); Trader's Ins. Co. v. Mann, 118 Ga. 381, 45 S.E. 426 (1903).46 Georgia Farm Bureau Mutual Ins. Co. v. Boney, 113 Ga.App.......
-
Southern Bell Tel. & Tel. Co. v. C & S Realty Co.
...Corp., 504 F.2d 518, 548 (5th Cir. 1974), citing Adams v. Cowart, 224 Ga. 210, 160 S.E.2d 805 (1968); B-X Corp. v. Jeter, 210 Ga. 250, 78 S.E.2d 790 (1953); Traders Ins. Co. v. Mann, 118 Ga. 381, 45 S.E. 426 (1903). Moreover, "the Georgia courts have placed a gloss on the requirements of § ......
-
Wright v. State, 21430
...treated as abandoned.' Almand v. Pate, 143 Ga. 711(1), 85 S.E. 909; Head v. Lee, 203 Ga. 191, 202, 45 S.E.2d 666; The B-X Corp. v. Jeter, 210 Ga. 250(4), 78 S.E.2d 790. 2. The second ground upon which the defendants rely is that the trial judge erred in failing to direct a verdict of acquit......
-
Georgia-Carolina Brick & Tile Co. v. Brown
...requirements of Code § 20-1404 (University Computing Co., supra) is manifest in cases dealing with injunctions. In B-X Corp. v. Jeter, 210 Ga. 250(3), 255, 78 S.E.2d 790, the court approved an award of attorney fees, though there were no damages awarded, because the defendant had acted in b......