Damil, Inc. v. First Nat. Bank of Dalton
| Decision Date | 08 March 1983 |
| Docket Number | No. 65667,65667 |
| Citation | Damil, Inc. v. First Nat. Bank of Dalton, 302 S.E.2d 600, 165 Ga.App. 678 (Ga. App. 1983) |
| Parties | DAMIL, INC. et al. v. FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF DALTON. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Quinton S. King, Atlanta, for appellants.
C. Lee Daniel III, Carlton C. McCamy, Dalton, Robert M. Brinson, Rome, for appellee.
This is an appeal by a grantor of a deed to secure debt from an order that the land be resold when the court refused to confirm a sale under power.
AppellantDamil, Inc., was the debtor, and appellant Chester was a guarantor of the debt and a grantor of a deed to secure the debt to appellee bank on several parcels of land owned by Chester and another.When the debt went into default appellee advertised two tracts of land in Dalton covered by the deed to be sold under power of sale.Tract 2 was rectangular with a restaurant located on it and Tract 1 was an "L" shaped adjoining parcel used as additional parking for the restaurant.Appellee's security deed on tract 2 was inferior to a security deed held by Calhoun Federal Savings and Loan who was also selling tract 2 under its power of sale.Apparently to protect its interest in tract 2, appellee bought tract 2 at Calhoun Federal's sale under power.Appellee then bought tract 1 at its own sale under power for $10,000, apparently based on its own appraiser's valuation.After a hearing to confirm appellee's sale of tract 1, the trial court refused to confirm the sale because of inadequacy of price and ordered the tract to be resold.Appeal is taken only from that portion of the order directing that the land be resold.Held:
Appellants contend that the order to resell was error because there was no evidence showing good cause for the resale as required by OCGA § 44-14-161(Code Ann. § 67-1505), and makes other equitable arguments.
We find no merit in appellant's contentions as the law is that a failure to sell for the true market value is good cause to order a resale.
...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Res-Ga Ljy, LLC v.
...before the sale and did sell the property for an amount equal to that appraisal”) (citations omitted); Damil, Inc. v. First Nat. Bank of Dalton, 165 Ga.App. 678, 302 S.E.2d 600 (1983) (affirming trial court's order granting resale on ground that “a failure to sell for the true market value ......
-
Sanusi v. Cmty. & S. Bank
...satisfied that the property so sold brought its true market value on such foreclosure sale.”).6 But see Damil, Inc. v. First Nat. Bank of Dalton, 165 Ga.App. 678, 302 S.E.2d 600 (1983) (“[T]he law is that a failure to sell for the true market value is good cause to order a resale.”); Homes ......
-
Vill. at Lake Lanier, LLC v. State Bank & Trust Co.
...Bank, supra. Accord Adams v. Gwinnett Commercial Bank, 140 Ga.App. 233, 234(3), 230 S.E.2d 324 (1976); Damil, Inc. v. First Nat. Bank of Dalton, 165 Ga.App. 678, 302 S.E.2d 600 (1983). 10. McGuire Holdings, LLLP v. TSQ Partners, LLC, 290 Ga.App. 595, 598(1)(b), 660 S.E.2d 397 (2008). 11. (C......
-
First Nat. Bank of Dalton v. Damil, Inc.
...superior court declined to confirm the sale on the basis that the price received had not been shown to represent fair market value. See 302 S.E.2d 600. See OCGA § 44-14-161. The parcel was then resold for $28,000, and the court, in accordance with the statute, confirmed the ...