Hargrove v. Youmans

• Court: Georgia Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: BECK
• Citation: Hargrove v. Youmans, 181 Ga. 614, 183 S.E. 564, 7 S.E.2d 181 (Ga. 1936)
• Decision Date: 17 January 1936
• Docket Number: No. 10821.,10821.
• Parties: HARGROVE et al. v. YOUMANS et al.

181 Ga. 614

183 S.E. 564

HARGROVE et al.

v.YOUMANS et al.

No. 10821.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

Jan. 17, 1936.

Syllabus by Editorial Staff.

Error from Superior Court, Emanuel County; R. N. Hardeman, Judge.

Petition by Jewell Hargrove and others against J. W. Youmans and others. To review a judgment sustaining a general demurrer to the petition, plaintiffs bring error.

Affirmed.

Mrs. Katie Hargrove and six of her children brought a proceeding against J. W. Youmans, the Savannah Bank & Trust Company and W. S. Hargrove. They claimed, in land described, a life tenancy in Mrs. Katie Hargrove and a six-sevenths undivided interest in the other plaintiffs; and they alleged as follows: On June 13, 1904, Mrs. Selina V. Vinson conveyed the land to Mrs. Katie Hargrove for life, with remainder to her children then born and all future children. A tax execution for $15.65, dated December 21, 1914, issued by the tax collector of Emanuel county, was levied on the land on May 19, 1915, which was later sold by the sheriff of Emanuel county to T. J. Kent. Kent later conveyed to W. L. Clark, and thereafter an execution in favor of Farmers Exchange Bank versus W. L. Clark was levied on the land as the property of W. L. Clark. A claim was filed by Mrs. Katie Hargrove and W. S. Hargrove, and by W. S. Hargrove as next friend of the other six plaintiffs, who were minors. A verdict finding the property subject was rendered on April 2, 1923, and judgment ordering the fi. fa. to proceed, was entered. Thereafter the sheriff of Candler county sold the land. J. W. Youmans became the purchaser and later executed a deed to secure debt to the Savannah Bank & Trust Company. W. S. Hargrove was named as a defendant by reason of the fact that he appeared as next friend for the six plaintiffs who were then minors.

The plaintiffs contended that the tax deed to Kent was void for lack of proper description; that the levy was excessive, the land being capable of division; that there was personal property of Mrs. Katie Hargrove on which there was no effort to levy; that the levy and sale and the sheriff's deed were void since all of the acts were done by officers of Emanuel county the land sold being in Candler county; that the claim as filed was not legal, for the reason that the affidavit was not made by the minors or by their agent or attorney at law; that there was no authority in law for a claim to be filed and prosecuted by minors through a next friend; that W. S. Hargrove was not the agent of the minor plaintiffs, nor was he their nextfriend, they having a living father who was authorized to act, and who had not relinquished parental control, and therefore was their natural guardian; that the judgment in the claim case was not a bar against the plaintiffs, because that claim was filed by W. S. Hargrove, a young man just at the age of majority, and was abandoned by him, and he had no lawful authority to represent any one but himself; that the verdict in...