Munford, Inc. v. Citizens & Southern Nat. Bank, 57882
| Decision Date | 04 September 1979 |
| Docket Number | No. 57882,57882 |
| Citation | 151 Ga.App. 112,258 S.E.2d 766 |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
| Parties | MUNFORD, INC. v. CITIZENS & SOUTHERN NATIONAL BANK. |
Charles M. Stapleton, Macon, for appellant.
Richard B. Miller, Macon, for appellee.
On August 9, 1961, J. A. Young, as lessor, and Handy Andy's Food Stores, Inc., as lessee, entered into a lease of business premises. The lease provided that "Lessee leases and shall use said premises for the operation of a general merchandise establishment . . . provided, however, the Lessee shall not sell any alcoholic beverages, save and except it may sell, if properly licensed to do so by the authority having jurisdiction thereof, packaged beer, not for consumption on the premises." Another provision of the lease stated that "(u)pon the failure of the Lessee . . . to comply with any of the terms, conditions or agreements herein contained, the Lessor shall have the right, without notice and without legal process, to declare this lease at an end and may forthwith enter said premises, and forcibly or otherwise remove all persons and things therefrom and repossess the same . . ."
The parties to this action for writ of possession are Munford, Inc., successor in interest to Handy Andy's Food Stores, Inc., and The Citizens and Southern National Bank, as executor of J. A. Young.
In May, 1974, Munford, Inc. began selling wine at the leased premises. The Citizens and Southern National Bank gave notice of its election to terminate the lease in September, 1977.
The parties waived a jury trial and the case was tried on a stipulation of facts. The trial court granted judgment in favor of The Citizens and Southern National Bank and ordered that a writ of possession issue to it. Munford, Inc. appeals, contending that this action is barred by Code Ann. § 3-717 (Ga.L.1953, p. 238). Held :
Code Ann. § 3-717, supra, provides that: Munford, Inc. contends that it matters not whether the restriction contained in the lease agreement be a "covenant" or as the Citizens and Southern National Bank contends, a "condition subsequent." If such was the intention of the legislature they...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pargar, LLC v. CP Summit Retail, LLC.
...a contractual condition. See, e.g., Rustin v. Butler, 195 Ga. 389, 391, 24 S.E.2d 318 (1943); Munford v. Citizens & Southern Nat. Bank, 151 Ga.App. 112, 113–114, 258 S.E.2d 766 (1979). It is sufficient that the letter, when read as a whole, qualified any exercise of the option on an agreeme......
-
Sheridan v. Crown Capital Corp., A01A1675.
...the agreement contained. "No precise technical words are required to create a condition subsequent." Munford, Inc. v. C & S Nat. Bank, 151 Ga.App. 112, 113-114, 258 S.E.2d 766 (1979); see also Fulton County v. Collum Properties, Inc., 193 Ga.App. 774, 775(1), 388 S.E.2d 916 (1989). "The law......
-
EMANUEL TRACTOR SALES v. DOT
...on any party. "No precise technical words are required to create a condition subsequent." Munford, Inc. v. Citizens & Southern Nat. Bank, 151 Ga.App. 112, 113-114, 258 S.E.2d 766 (1979) (sale of alcohol on leased premises violated a condition subsequent of the lease authorizing the lessor t......
-
Fulton County v. Collum Properties, Inc.
...forfeitures." OCGA § 23-1-23. No precise technical words are necessary to create a condition subsequent. Munford, Inc. v. C & S Nat. Bank, 151 Ga.App. 112, 113, 258 S.E.2d 766. Neither are precise technical words necessary to create a covenant. However, "[w]ords such as 'on condition that,'......