Logan v. Nunnelly, 27845
| Decision Date | 10 May 1973 |
| Docket Number | No. 27845,27845 |
| Citation | 230 Ga. 588,198 S.E.2d 321 |
| Parties | Ruby C. LOGAN v. Alice Lee NUNNELLY et al. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Frank M. Gleason, Ross L. Hatcher, III, Rossville, for appellant.
Herman Spence, Spence & Milam, Blue Ridge, for appellees.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
This case originated when Ruby C. Logan filed in the court of ordinary an application to be appointed permanent administratrix on the estate of Charlie T. Logan. The caveat of Alice Lee Nunnelly and Helen Stphens filed thereto was sustained and on appeal to a jury in the superior court the verdict and judgment was likewise in favor of the caveatrices. The ground upon which the caveat was sustained was that the applicant was not the lawful widow of Charlie Logan. In entering its judgment in favor of the caveatrices, the superior court decreed and determined that a certain divorce decree in the case of Charles T. Logan v. Ethel Logan entered in the Superior Court of Hamilton County, Tennessee, is void and a nullity and the court further determined and decreed that by reason of that determination Ruby Logan is not the lawful widow of Charlie T. Logan. The case was appealed to the Court of Appeals and was by that court transferred to this court. See Logan v. Nunnelly, 128 Ga.App. 43, 195 S.E.2d 659, for a more complete statement of the facts.
The appeal must be returned to the Court of Appeals. The case is not one in equity. It originated in the court of ordinary which does not have general equity jurisdiction. On appeal the jurisdiction of the superior court was no greater than that of the court of ordinary. It cannot be seriously questioned that thc court of ordinary may not entertain a complaint in equity. Nothing in the Civil Practice Act can be construed as authorizing the superior court to entertain a complaint in equity in a case on appeal from the court of ordinary. The principles upon which we base this decision are fully set forth in McDowell v. McDowell, 194 Ga. 88, 20 S.E.2d 602. See also Darnell v. Tate, 208 Ga. 23, 64 S.E.2d 582; Snell v. Lopez, 211 Ga. 60, 84 S.E.2d 45; Goodman v. Little, 213 Ga. 178, 97 S.E.2d 567; Victoria Corp. v. Atlanta Merchandise Mart., Inc., 215 Ga. 568, 111 S.E.2d 374.
Returned to the Court of Appeals.
All the Justices concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Evans v. Evans
...v. Little, 246 Ga. 219, 221, 271 S.E.2d 138 (1980) (superior court, not probate court, has equity jurisdiction); see Logan v. Nunnelly, 230 Ga. 588, 198 S.E.2d 321 (1973) (probate court does not have general equity jurisdiction). The only reason the executor held the property is that he had......
-
Evans v. Little, 36248
...court is without jurisdiction to resolve this dispute which involves equitable claims asserted by these co-tenants. Logan v. Nunnelly, 230 Ga. 588, 198 S.E.2d 321 (1973). "Equity jurisdiction ... shall extend to ... accounts between ... tenants in common." Code Ann. § 37-301; Brewton v. McL......
-
In re Longino, A06A1025.
...of equity jurisdiction." OCGA § 53-12-4. Equity jurisdiction is in the superior court, not the probate court. Logan v. Nunnelly, 230 Ga. 588, 198 S.E.2d 321 (1973); Evans v. Little, 246 Ga. 219, 221, 271 S.E.2d 138 (1980). Moreover, the probate court had no jurisdiction to determine conflic......
- Coweta Bonding Co. v. Carter, 27844