Grooms v. Grooms

• Decision Date: 10 March 1914
• Citation: 81 S.E. 210,141 Ga. 478
• Parties: GROOMS v. GROOMS ET AL.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

81 S.E. 210

141 Ga. 478

GROOMS v. GROOMS ET AL.

Supreme Court of Georgia

March 10, 1914

Syllabus by the Court.

In an action by a vendee against a vendor and his assignee with notice, to compel specific performance of a parol contract for the sale of land, by virtue of which the vendee alleged that he went into possession and erected valuable improvements on the faith of it, and made a tender of the balance of the purchase money, which was declined by the vendor, it was not erroneous to instruct the jury that the plaintiff would not be entitled to a decree unless he showed full performance of the contract on his part, which included the payment or tender of the purchase money.

If after notice that another has made a contract for the purchase of land, a third person cuts in, buys it, and takes a conveyance, such person stands in the place of his vendor and a court of equity, if it would decree a specific performance of the contract against the latter, will render a like decree against the former.

Where a judge certifies to having given a specific instruction, which is erroneous, and the general charge as sent up in the record does not contain it, but does contain an instruction correctly embodying the law on the same subject, both charges will be deemed to have been given. Where such contradictory instructions appertain to a material issue in the case, a new trial must result where the erroneous charge is not withdrawn in express terms or by the context.

Error from Superior Court, Bulloch County; B. T. Rawlings, Judge.

Action by H. J. Grooms against G. P. Grooms and another for specific performance. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiff brings error. Reversed.

H. B Strange, of Statesboro, for plaintiff in error.

Fred T. Lanier, of Statesboro, for defendants in error.

EVANS P.J.

The action was by H. J. Grooms against G. P. Grooms and T. L. Grooms for specific performance of an oral contract for the purchase of land. The plaintiff and the defendants are brothers. It was alleged that in 1901 the plaintiff purchased from G. P. Grooms, for the sum of $300, a certain tract of land; that at the time of the purchase he paid G. P. Grooms $100, and agreed to pay the balance in two annual installments of $100 each; that in pursuance of the contract of purchase he went into possession of the land and erected valuable improvements thereon; that after his purchase G. P. Grooms sold the land to T. L. Grooms, the latter agreeing at the time that he would make and deliver to the plaintiff a deed to the land upon the payment of the balance of the purchase money, which he now refuses to do; and that the plaintiff had offered to pay the balance of the purchase money. He tendered the amount into court, and prayed for specific performance of the contract. The defendants denied the various allegations of the petition, and further averred that at one time there was an executory agreement to sell the land to the plaintiff, provided he could arrange a payment; but he failed to make any payment, and, shortly after he went into possession of the land, admitted that he could not pay for it, and that since that time he had been occupying the land as tenant, and not as owner, and had recognized the defendants' title by paying to them at different times rent for the use of the premises. The trial resulted in a verdict for the defendants. The plaintiff was denied a new trial, and he excepts.

1. The court instructed the jury that before the plaintiff would be entitled to a specific...