Gunby v. Thompson
| Citation | 56 Ga. 317 |
| Parties | Robert M. Gunby, plaintiff in error. v. George H. Thompson,defendant in error. |
| Decision Date | 31 January 1876 |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Injunction. Receiver. Before Judge James Johnson. Muscogee County. At Chambers. June 5th, 1875.
Thompson filed his bill against Gunby and Ellis & Harrison, making, in brief, the following case:
On August 1st, 1866, one George Hargraves agreed to convey to R. M. Gunby and D. L. Booker lot number sixty-two, in the city of Columbus, for $15,000 00, one-fourth to be paid cash, the remainder in five years, with interest payable annually. When one-fourth of the purchase money should be paid and a mortgage on the property given to secure the balance, *Hargraves was to convey it to Gunby and Booker in fee simple. On October 1st, 1866, Gunby took possession of the premises with the consent of Hargraves, but without performing his part of the contract, nor has he ever done so. Booker, in the meantime, released his interest to Gunby. On October 1st, 1872, Gunby made an agreement with Thompson, in which, after reciting the previous contracts between Hargraves, Booker and Gunby, and between Hargraves and Thompson, and payments made by Gunby, amounting to $4,475 50, he promised to pay to Thompson, by the 1st of October, 1873, the balance due on the property, and receive a deed to the same; or in default of this to deliver possession to Thompson, and to relinquish all right thereto. Gunby failed either to pay the money or to deliver possession. On the lot were a dwelling house, outhouses, and a store-house. About October 1st, 1874, Gunby delivered possession of all the premises except the store-room, which he refused to release. He received rent for the lot during the years 1873 and 1874, only paying a part of it to Thompson.
About October 1st, 1874, he rented the store-room to Ellis & Harrison. Finding; them in possession, complainant requested them to pay the rents to him, which they refused to do on the ground that Gunby was their landlord. Gunby and Ellis & Harrison are insolvent, and complainant prays that Ellis & Harrison be enjoined from paying the rents to Gunby; that Gunby be compelled to perform the contract by releasing the storehouse; and that, in the meantime, a receiver be appointed to take charge of the property and to collect the rents pending the litigation.
The answer of Gunby was, substantially, as follows:
He admits the contracts between Gunby, Booker and Hargraves; says the property was purchased for H. C. Mitchell & Company, a firm composed of H. C. Mitchell, R. M. Gunby and R. B. Gunby; they expended a...
To continue reading
Request your trial