Hobbs v. Ldavis

• Decision Date: 31 July 1873
• Citation: 50 Ga. 213
• Parties: RICHARD HOBBS, plaintiff in error. v. WILLIAM L.DAVIS, defendant in error.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

50 Ga. 213

RICHARD HOBBS, plaintiff in error. v. WILLIAM L.DAVIS, defendant in error.

Supreme Court of the State of Georgia

(Atlanta, July Term, 1873.)

Landlord's Lien. Distress warrant. Purchaser. Debtor and creditor. Sales. Before D. H Pope, Esq., Judge pro hac vice. Dougherty Superior Court. April Term, 1873.

Richard Hobbs rented a store-house in Albany, Georgia, to Joseph L. Raine, for the year ending October 1st, 1870. On August 1st, 1870, Hobbs sued out two distress warrants against said tenant, one for $450 00, rent due, and the other for $22 5 00, rent not yet due. Levies were made upon a stock of goods which was claimed by William L. Davis.

It is presumed that the two cases were tried together, though the record is silent upon this point.

The claimant relied upon a purchase made of said stock before said distress warrants were issued. Raine was indebted to him between $1,500 00 and $2,500 00. He canceled this debt, and paid him about $250 00 surplus. Raine was insolvent at the time of the sale.

The jury returned a verdict for the claimant. Whereupon the plaintiff moved for a new trial upon the following grounds:

1st. Because said verdict is contrary to the following charge: "If said sale was made with intent to delay and defraud, and said intent was known to the purchasing creditor, it was void. A bona fide transaction upon a valuable consideration, and without notice, or grounds for reasonable suspicion, is valid."

2d. Because the Court erred in refusing to charge as follows: "The landlord, when he rents a store, had a lien on the goods in the store for his rent as against a purchaser ofthose goods, from the beginning of the contract."

*3d. Because the Court erred in charging as follows: "The landlord's lien begins only from the levy of the distress warrant."

The motion was overruled, and the plaintiff excepted.

Hines & Hobbs, for plaintiff in error.

William E. Smith; R. F. Eyon.for defendant.

McCAY, Judge.

1. We do not think that, even at the common law, or under any English statute before we adopted the English law, the landlord bad a lien on his tenant's property, as against a purchaser from him, during the term. But even if this were so, our law regulates their rights very differently. The lien of the landlord, except on the crop, does not commence until his distress warrant issues: R. Code, see. 2260.

2. Without question, there are suspicious circumstances attending this transfer of the goods to Davis, and had the jury found the...