South Georgia Trust Co. v. Neal

Decision Date18 December 1931
Docket Number8492.
Citation161 S.E. 815,174 Ga. 24
PartiesSOUTH GEORGIA TRUST CO. v. NEAL.
CourtGeorgia Supreme Court

Syllabus OPINION.

Submitting to jury question of construction of contract will not warrant reversal, where contract was properly construed with same result as if court construed it (Civ. Code 1910, § 4265).

Agreement to pay on or before July 14 held to give party entire day within which to make payment.

Error from Superior Court, Dougherty County; B. C. Gardner, Judge.

Suit by John Neal against the South Georgia Trust Company. There was a judgment for plaintiff, defendant's motion for a new trial was overruled, and defendant brings error.

Affirmed.

Agreement to pay on or before July 14 held to give party entire day within which to make payment.

The South Georgia Trust Company filed suit against John Neal, in the city court of Albany, in May, 1930, on certain notes, to secure which a deed to described property was executed, and following the filing of the suit on the notes, the property was advertised for sale under power embodied in the security deed. John Neal thereupon filed a petition to enjoin the suit on the notes and the sale of the property. Pending this suit counsel for both parties entered into an agreement in the form of a letter as follows:

"June 7, 1930.
"Judge E. L. Smith, Attorney at Law,
"Albany, Georgia.
"Dear Sir:
"In re South Georgia Trust Co. v. John Neal, City Court of Albany; and John Neal v. South Georgia Trust Co. Equitable petition Dougherty Superior Court.
"My client has agreed, and I will get him to sign his approval on the bottom of this letter, that he will pay to South Georgia Trust Company on or before the second Monday in July, 1930, to wit, July 14, 1930, the sum of $3,550 in full settlement of all claims and demands of every kind whatsoever held by South Georgia Trust Company against John Neal, and in full and complete satisfaction of the suit now pending in favor of South Georgia Trust Company against John Neal, filed to the May term, 1930, of the City Court of Albany, Georgia. All security deeds held by South Georgia Trust Company to be canceled of record. John Neal also to pay the costs of court. Unless these payments are made on or before the July term, 1930, of the City Court of Albany, you are authorized and directed to take a judgment for the full amount claimed in the said suit now pending in the city court of Albany, Georgia, in favor of South Georgia Trust Company against John Neal. The payment on or before said time to operate as a full and complete satisfaction as aforesaid.
"Yours very truly,
"[Signed] S. B. Lippett, John Neal."

The city court of Albany convened on the morning of Monday, July 14, 1930, and when the case of the South Georgia Trust Company v. John Neal was reached on the calendar, the attorney for John Neal, not having heard from him, struck his answer and consented for a verdict and judgment to be taken against him. This was shortly after court had convened. About an hour after the judgment had been taken, John Neal appeared, stated that he was ready to carry out his agreement as expressed in the letter set out above, and made a tender of the full amount agreed upon. The trust company refused to accept the amount, on the ground that the time for payment under the terms of the agreement had expired, and counsel for the defendant had agreed to the verdict and judgment.

Whereupon John Neal brought a petition setting up facts substantially as set out above; claiming that under the terms of the agreement he had all the time during the day of July 14 1930, within which to make payment; and praying that the trust company, its agents, officers, etc., be enjoined from further prosecution of the suit and the judgment, and from advertisement or any foreclosure on the loan deed, and be required to deliver up and cancel the notes and security deed on receipt of payment of $3,550 and costs of court, in accordance with the agreement; and for general relief. The trust company filed its answer, contending that the agreement entered into had expired at the time judgment was taken in thecity court of Albany, that counsel for petitioner consented to the taking of judgment, and that it was binding. At interlocutory hearing the judge ordered that the injunction prayed for be granted, but "further ordered as follows: (a) That should defendant, South Georgia Trust Company, surrender to plaintiff, John Neal, within ten days from this date, all of its lien papers of whatsoever character against the property described in plaintiff's petition, marked canceled and satisfied, provided the said John Neal will simultaneously therewith pay to the defendant $3,550, plus costs of court on the judgment issued from the city court of Albany, and also execute and deliver to defendant a second lien, subject to first lien only, which may be executed by said John Neal to procure the said $3,550 and said costs, which said...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Allstate Ins. Co. v. Brannon
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • July 15, 1994
    ...result would have been the same as reached by the jury in their verdict. Main v. Simmons, 2 Ga.App. 821 (59 SE 85); [cit.]." South Ga. Trust Co. v. Neal, 174 Ga. 24, hn. 2, 161 S.E. 815. The special verdict form employed in the case sub judice shows that the jury was instructed to make thre......
  • Colonial Penn Ins. Co. v. Hart
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • May 12, 1982
    ...566, supra. Under the facts of the instant case we are unable to say that the error was harmless. Compare South Georgia Trust Co. v. Neal, 174 Ga. 24 (2), 161 S.E. 815 (1931). 4. Colonial Penn contends that the trial court erred in giving certain instructions to the jury on the law of negli......
  • Crocker v. Tam, 61264
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • May 6, 1981
    ...she failed or refused to consummate the transaction. Tam was not required to close until January 31, 1980. South Ga. Trust Co. v. Neal, 174 Ga. 24, 25, 161 S.E. 815 (1931). Since no marketable title could be conveyed by the seller at that time, Crocker is not entitled to a commission from T......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT