McCrary v. Salmon
Decision Date | 15 April 1941 |
Docket Number | 13588. |
Citation | 15 S.E.2d 442,192 Ga. 313 |
Parties | McCRARY v. SALMON. |
Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Rehearing Denied June 14, 1941.
The administrator of the estate of Mrs. Grace, deceased advertised separately described realty and personalty to be sold on the public-sale day in June, 1935. Mrs. Salmon interposed claims to the property so advertised, and both claims were returned to the superior court and docketed by the numbers 5812 (relating to realty) and 5855 (relating to personalty). On July 17, 1936, Mrs. Salmon, in aid of the claims and in order to establish her right to the property in question, filed her 'equitable petition' in the nature of an amendment, seeking to set up and compel specific performance of an alleged parol contract witn Mrs. Grace whereby the latter agreed with petitioner 'that if petitioner would look after and care for and nurse and see that she was properly cared for as long as she lived, that she, Mrs. Grace, would execute a will giving to petitioner all of her property both real and personal, and money, at the death of said Mrs. Grace.' It was also alleged that Mrs. Grace left described property, other than the specific realty and personalty described in the claims that would be within the contract; but by amendment this claim to such other property was withdrawn. Other allegations were full performance of the contract on the part of the claimant, and failure by inadvertence on the part of Mrs. Grace to make the will. The amendment contained the following prayers:
The equitable amendment and the amendment thereto were both duly allowed. The administrator filed an answer to the equitable petition, and the answer was amended. Under the pleadings the parties were at issue as to the alleged parol contract. The case as thus presented was tried under a stipulation between the parties to try the claim cases together. There was no order of court expressly providing for consolidating the claim cases as originally docketed. The jury returned two identical verdicts 'in favor of the claimant,' which by instruction of the judge were entered respectively on each of the statutory claims. The administrator made two motions for a new trial, based on the general grounds. Afterwards, treating the whole proceeding as one by Mrs. Salmon for both equitable and legal relief, the administrator presented two amendments of the motion for a new trial. A new trial was refused, and the administrator took a single bill of exceptions, assigning error on the refusal of a new trial.
Fred C. Salmon testified: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Ray v. Sears
...Sherling v. Continental Trust Co., 175 Ga. 672(15), 165 S.E. 560; Epperson v. Stancill, 180 Ga. 857, 858, 181 S.E. 170; McCrary v. Salmon, 192 Ga. 313, 317, 15 S.E.2d 442; Haynes v. Ellis, 199 Ga. 702, 705, 35 S.E.2d 151; Patrick v. Holliday, 200 Ga. 259, 263(2), 36 S.E.2d 769. However, the......
-
Salmon v. McCrary
...by the law, and reversed the judgment of the trial court overruling the administrator's motion for new trial. See McCrary v. Salmon, 192 Ga. 313, 15 S.E.2d 442. the second trial a nonsuit was granted. This court, in Salmon v. McCrary, 194 Ga. 413, 21 S.E.2d 857, affirmed that judgment. Afte......
-
Nail v. Nail
...140 Ga. 463(4), 79 S.E. 142; Moss v. Moss, 184 Ga. 47, 190 S.E. 574; Clifton v. State, 187 Ga. 502, 2 S.E.2d 102; McCrary v. Salmon, 192 Ga. 313(2), 15 S.E.2d 442; Hood v. Connell, 204 Ga. 782(2), 51 S.E.2d 4. 'This court can not consider as a brief of evidence a document appearing as such ......
- Deen v. Baxley State Bank