Goza v. Browning

• Decision Date: 15 July 1895
• Citation: 23 S.E. 842,96 Ga. 421
• Parties: GOZA et al. v. BROWNING.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

23 S.E. 842

96 Ga. 421

GOZA et al.

v.BROWNING.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

July 15, 1895.

Documentary Evidence—Identity of Signature — Comparison of Handwriting—Subscribing Witness — Necessity of Calling — Opinion Evidence—Forgery.

1. A deed proven to be 30 years of age, purporting to be signed by the alleged grantor, and under which he surrendered possession to the person purporting to be the grantee, who. by himself and his privies in estate, remained in possession, was so far proven to be the genuine deed of the alleged grantor, and so far established the genuineness of his signature thereto, as to authorize its admission in evidence, for the purpose of a comparison of handwriting, upon the trial of a cause involving the question of the genuineness of the signature of such grantor to another instrument.

2. Upon a standard of genuineness thus established, it is competent to introduce opinions of persons proven to be experts in handwriting, to the effect that the signature which appears upon the instrument, the genuineness of which is in issue, was not made by the same person who signed the deed so proven to be genuine.

3. In the trial of an issue formed upon a petition to cancel a deed on the ground of forgery, it is competent for the plaintiff to introduce the deed, and then prove the fact of forgery by any competent evidence at his command, without calling or accounting for the alleged subscribing witnesses; and this is true even though the deed so attacked may, upon its face, purport to be an ancient document.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

Error from superior court, Dekalb county; R. H. Clark, Judge.

Action by Dewitt Goza and others against Caroline Browning to cancel a deed. There was a judgment for defendant, and plaintiffs bring error. Reversed.

Garrett & Neufville and W. I. Heyward, for plaintiffs in error.

Candler & Thomson, for defendant in error.

SIMMONS, C. J. This was an equitable action to cancel a deed alleged to be a forgery. On the trial of the case the plaintiffs, for the purpose of proving, by comparison of handwriting, the alleged forgery, offered in evidence a deed purporting to be signed by the same person whose name was signed as grantor to the alleged forged deed. The deed thus offered appeared to have been executed more than 30 years prior to the time of the trial; and there was evidence that the alleged grantor surrendered possession to the person named as grantee therein, and that the latter remained in possession, claiming under the...