State Banking Co v. Miller, No. 12137.

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
Writing for the CourtHUTCHESON
Citation185 Ga. 653,196 S.E. 47
Decision Date08 March 1938
Docket NumberNo. 12137.
PartiesSTATE BANKING CO. v. MILLER et al.
185 Ga. 653

196 S.E. 47

STATE BANKING CO.
v.
MILLER et al.

No. 12137.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

March 8, 1938.


Judgment Adhered to After Rehearing March 26, 1938.

Syllabus by Editorial Staff.
[196 S.E. 48]

Error from Superior Court, Hall County; B. P. Gaillard, Jr., Judge.

Suit by the State Banking Company against T. C. Miller, wherein plaintiff had judgment, execution was levied, and defendant's children interposed claim to property levied upon. To review a judgment on a directed verdict for the claimants, plaintiff brings error.

Reversed.

On January 26, 1932, the State Banking Company filed suit against T. C. Miller on two notes dated March 14, 1930, one for $2,949.06, another for $64.70. On May 18, 1932, judgment thereon was obtained, on which judgment execution issued on June 10, 1932, and was duly recorded. On October 4, 1932, this execution was levied on 105 acres of farm land and certain town lots as the property of the defendant in execution. The children of the defendant interposed a claim to the property by reason of a deed executed by the defendant, dated 1923, reciting delivery and a consideration of $3,000, and conveying 225 acres of farm land to the wife of the defendant for life or widowhood, with remainder to their children, the claimants, the 105 acres levied on being a part of 225 acres so conveyed. The plaintiff attacked this deed as fraudulent, and on the trial adduced substantially the following evidence: The defendant was in posses-

[196 S.E. 49]

sion of the 225 acres from 1923 to the time of trial, exercising acts of ownership such as renting parts of it, collecting the rents, and returning it for taxation. In 1924 the defendant insured the dwelling house thereon in his own name. The wife never returned the property for taxation, and neither the wife or the children made any claim to it before the death of. the wife in 1931. In 1930 and 1931 the defendant executed to another bank security deeds conveying 120 acres of the land described in the deed from him to his wife and children; this, however, was not the 105 acres levied on. In 1928 the defendant executed to the plaintiff a note marked as a renewal note. There was no evidence to show when, before 1928, the defendant became indebted to the plaintiff. One of the officers of the plaintiff bank testified that at the time the loans were renewed he "understood" that the defendant owned the property in controversy. There was no evidence of either title or possession of the defendant as to the town lots levied upon. One of the claimants testified that the deed above described was found, after the death of the wife, in. the iron safe of the defendant in the wife's "little box" with the wife's individual papers. This deed was recorded on March 23, 1932. All of the claimants agreed with the defendant that he remain in possession of the 225 acres and manage and operate the lands as he pleased for life. A witness for the plaintiff, who was one of the witnesses to the deed upon which the claimants relied, testified as to its execution, but was unable to remember the date when it was actually executed, and he gave no estimate thereof. The defendant did not testify. The court directed a verdict for the claimant. The plaintiff's motion for new trial, assigning error on the direction of the verdict and on certain special grounds, was overruled, and the plaintiff excepted.

Joseph G. Collins, Wheeler & Kenyon, and Chas. J. Thurmond, all of Gainesville, for plaintiff in error.

Oliver & Oliver and G. Fred Kelley, all of Gainesville, for defendants in error.

Syllabus Opinion by the Court.

HUTCHESON...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 practice notes
  • Moore v. Atlanta Transit System, Inc., No. 39008
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (Georgia)
    • November 9, 1961
    ...Ga. 75, 29 S.E. 482; Groover v. Wilkes, 145 Ga. 714, 89 S.E. 761; Hill v. McLendon, 147 Ga. 733, 95 S.E. 232; State Banking Co. v. Miller, 185 Ga. 653, 196 S.E. 47; Higgins v. Trentham, 186 Ga. 264, 197 S.E. 862, supra; Smith v. Smith, 206 Ga. 461, 57 S.E.2d 611, supra), cases in which ther......
  • U.S. v. Reid, No. CV196-053.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 11th Circuit. United States District Court (Southern District of Georgia)
    • August 17, 2000
    ...If Reid sold land and retained possession of the land after the sale, there is prima facie evidence of fraud. State Banking Co. v. Miller, 185 Ga. 653, 655, 196 S.E. 47 (1938). If the Government establishes a prima facie case of fraudulent intent, the burden of proof shifts to Reid to estab......
  • Chrysler Motors Corp. v. Davis, Nos. 25538
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Georgia
    • March 10, 1970
    ...Ga. 75, 29 S.E. 482; Groover v. Wilkes, 145 Ga. 714, 89 S.E. 761; Hill v. McLendon, 147 Ga. 733, 95 S.E. 232; State Banking Co. v. Miller, 185 Ga. 653, 196 S.E. 47; Higgins v. Trentham, 186 Ga. 264, 197 S.E. 862; Hobbs v. Houston, 190 Ga. 505, 9 S.E.2d 749; Miller v. Everett, 192 Ga. 26, 14......
  • Thompson v. Hutchins, No. 17135
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Georgia
    • July 11, 1950
    ...interference amounts to a continuing nuisance or trespass and where an injunction would prevent a multiplicity of suits.' [185 Ga. 601, 196 S.E. 47.] And in Dodson v. Evans, supra, it was held: 'But the unlawful closing or obstructing of a private way, like that described in the present pet......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
13 cases
  • Moore v. Atlanta Transit System, Inc., No. 39008
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (Georgia)
    • November 9, 1961
    ...Ga. 75, 29 S.E. 482; Groover v. Wilkes, 145 Ga. 714, 89 S.E. 761; Hill v. McLendon, 147 Ga. 733, 95 S.E. 232; State Banking Co. v. Miller, 185 Ga. 653, 196 S.E. 47; Higgins v. Trentham, 186 Ga. 264, 197 S.E. 862, supra; Smith v. Smith, 206 Ga. 461, 57 S.E.2d 611, supra), cases in which ther......
  • U.S. v. Reid, No. CV196-053.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 11th Circuit. United States District Court (Southern District of Georgia)
    • August 17, 2000
    ...If Reid sold land and retained possession of the land after the sale, there is prima facie evidence of fraud. State Banking Co. v. Miller, 185 Ga. 653, 655, 196 S.E. 47 (1938). If the Government establishes a prima facie case of fraudulent intent, the burden of proof shifts to Reid to estab......
  • Chrysler Motors Corp. v. Davis, Nos. 25538
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Georgia
    • March 10, 1970
    ...Ga. 75, 29 S.E. 482; Groover v. Wilkes, 145 Ga. 714, 89 S.E. 761; Hill v. McLendon, 147 Ga. 733, 95 S.E. 232; State Banking Co. v. Miller, 185 Ga. 653, 196 S.E. 47; Higgins v. Trentham, 186 Ga. 264, 197 S.E. 862; Hobbs v. Houston, 190 Ga. 505, 9 S.E.2d 749; Miller v. Everett, 192 Ga. 26, 14......
  • Thompson v. Hutchins, No. 17135
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Georgia
    • July 11, 1950
    ...interference amounts to a continuing nuisance or trespass and where an injunction would prevent a multiplicity of suits.' [185 Ga. 601, 196 S.E. 47.] And in Dodson v. Evans, supra, it was held: 'But the unlawful closing or obstructing of a private way, like that described in the present pet......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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