Leachman v. Cobb Development Co., 27123
| Decision Date | 15 June 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 27123,27123 |
| Citation | 190 S.E.2d 537,229 Ga. 207 |
| Parties | Marie LEACHMAN v. COBB DEVELOPMENT COMPANY |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court
When a motion for summary judgment is made by a defendant, charged with fraud, which motion is supported by evidence of good faith in the transaction, and there is no evidence before the trial judge making an issue on the question of fraud, it is not error to grant summary judgment to the defendant.
Levine, D'Alessio & Cohn, Morton P. Levine, Burger, Beasley, Baird, Flemister & Slotin, Walter V. Beasley, Atlanta, for appellant.
Holcomb & McDuff, Frank D. Holcomb, Marietta, for appellee.
This appeal is from the grant of a summary judgment to the defendant.
Marie Leachman, as trustee in bankruptcy for H. A. Walker, Sr., H. A. Walker, Jr., and Walker & Walker Builders, a partnership, brought a complaint against Cobb Developement Company seeking to set aside a deed made by the Walkers to Cobb Development Company, or in lieu thereof to require the defendant to pay to the plaintiff any and all equity in the real estate at the time of the conveyance. The action was based on Code § 28-201(3), which provides that every voluntary deed or conveyance, not for a valuable consideration, made by a debtor insolvent at the time of such conveyance, is fraudulent in law against creditors.
In the former appearnace of the case in this court, it was held that the allegations of the complaint, 'that the bankrupts transferred this property by deed without consideration at a time when they were insolvent or were rendered insolvent by the transfer, that the transfer was made to delay creditors, that they were coerced by the defendant to deed the property to it, and that at the time of the transfer the bankrupts had equity in the property.' stated a claim on which relief could be granted. Leachman v. Cobb Development Co., 226 Ga. 103, 172 S.E.2d 688.
The defendant filed a motion for summary judgment, based on the affidavit of James M. Stanley, secretary-treasurer of the defendant, and his deposition, which was taken by the plaintiff. The plaintif produced no evidence in rebuttal.
The affidavit and deposition on the secretary-treasurer of the defendant showed that the deed from the Walkers to the defendant was not a voluntary conveyance. The Walkers were building houses on the properties transferred by the deed, and had become heavily indebted. The defendant paid more than $1,800 to the Walkers at the time of the conveyance. Thereafter it completed...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Guillebeau v. Jenkins
...fraud must introduce some evidence from which an inference of fraud may be drawn in order to make an issue." Leachman v. Cobb Dev. Co., 229 Ga. 207, 209, 190 S.E.2d 537. Since there is no evidence from which an inference of fraud may be drawn, the trial court properly awarded summary judgme......
-
Feely v. First American Bank of Georgia, N.A.
...trial court properly may award summary judgment to the defendant-movant. Id. at 231-232, 355 S.E.2d 453; accord Leachman v. Cobb Dev. Co., 229 Ga. 207, 209, 190 S.E.2d 537. As to the first count, the counterclaim on its face alleges a fraud as to the note captioned as "note 1" in plaintiff'......
-
Cambron v. Canal Ins. Co.
...indicates that sufficient evidence was presented at trial to require submission of the case to the jury. See Leachman v. Cobb Develop. Co., 229 Ga. 207, 190 S.E.2d 537 (1972); Nixon v. Brown, 225 Ga. 811, 171 S.E.2d 512 (1969); Code Ann. § 37-706. Similarly, appellants' fourth enumeration a......
-
Central Soya Co., Inc. v. Bundrick, 50930
...good faith. Code Ann. § 81A-156(e); Stephens County v. Gaines, 128 Ga.App. 661(1), 197 S.E.2d 424. See also Leachman v. Cobb Development Co., 229 Ga. 207, 209, 190 S.E.2d 537 and Maxey-Bosshardt Lumber Co. v. Maxwell, 127 Ga.App. 429, 193 S.E.2d " The party opposing a motion for summary jud......