Echols v. Thompson, 18294
| Decision Date | 14 September 1953 |
| Docket Number | No. 18294,18294 |
| Citation | 77 S.E.2d 521,210 Ga. 37 |
| Parties | ECHOLS v. THOMPSON. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
The allegations of the present petition--to the effect that the seller received the $2,000 down payment, refused to deliver possession after execution of the deeds, and, while the parties occupied the relation of landlord and tenant, the seller without paying reasonable rental foreclosed the second security deed and bought in the property, thus divesting the purchaser of her legal rights--were sufficient as against demurrer to set forth a cause of action for equitable relief, and the trial judge did not err in overruling the defendant's general and special grounds of demurrer.
Mrs. Ethel P. Thompson filed in Fulton Superior Court, against Mrs. Minnie L. Echols, a petition which as amended alleged substantially the following: On September 28, 1950, the petitioner and the defendant entered into a written contract whereby the petitioner agreed to purchase and the defendant agreed to sell a described house and lot at the price of $11,500, to be paid $2,000 cash, buyer to assume a $4,000 loan in favor of First Federal payable $39.04 monthly, and make a second mortgage in favor of the seller for the balance, payable $55 monthly. The petitioner made the $2,000 down payment. Under the special stipulations of the sales contract, the seller was 'to pay first and second mortgage notes' until she gave possession of the property, and possession was to be given not later than January 1, 1951. On September 29, 1950, the petitioner executed a second security deed to the defendant to secure a note for $5,519.04, payable $55 per month, beginning November 1, 1950. Thereafter the petitioner demanded possession of the defendant, but she failed and refused to surrender the property to the petitioner. About August 7, 1951, the defendant, for the alleged reason that the indebtedness which the second security deed was given to secure had become in default, exercised the power of sale contained therein, foreclosed on the property, and brought it in for $2,200. By reason of the above facts the sale under the second security deed was wrongful, fraudulent, and malicious. The defendant had been unjustly enriched at the expense of the petitioner, and in all fairness and good conscience equity should set adide the entire transaction, and the petitioner should recover of the defendant $2,000. Copies of the sale contract and the second security deed were attached as exhibits and made parts of the petition.
The petitioner prayed: that process issue; that equity set aside the entire transaction between the petitioner and the defendant; that the petitioner have judgment against the defendant for $2,000 principal plus interest at the rate of 7 percent per annum from September 28, 1950; and that the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pinkerton Nat. Detective Agency, Inc. v. Stevens
...a motion to dismiss in the nature of a general demurrer is not good if any part of the petition states a cause of action. Echols v. Thompson, 210 Ga. 37, 77 S.E.2d 521; Neloms v. Mathis, 98 Ga.App. 465, 105 S.E.2d 768. Insofar as this action seeks to recover medical expenses, this is a prop......
-
Farmers & Merchants Bank of Manchester v. Gibson
...of action for the relief prayed, and the trial court erred in striking the petition on oral motion of the defendants. Echols v. Thompson, 210 Ga. 37, 77 S.E.2d 521. Judgment All the Justices concur. ...
-
Brown v. Granite Holding Corp.
...or equitable relief or both. Code §§ 37-901, 37-907. Pardue Medicine Co. v. Pardue, 194 Ga. 516(1), 22 S.E.2d 143; and Echols v. Thompson, 210 Ga. 37, 38, 77 S.E.2d 521. Here the allegations of the petition are sufficient to state a cause of action for both the legal and the equitable relie......
-
Echols v. Thompson
...of real estate by the defendant to the plaintiff. A full statement of the allegations of the petition may be found in Echols v. Thompson, 210 Ga. 37, 77 S.E.2d 521. On the trial before a court and jury, the judge overruled the defendant's motions for a nonsuit and for a directed verdict. Th......