Watson v. Goolsby

Decision Date16 March 1891
PartiesWatson v. Goolsby.
CourtGeorgia Supreme Court

Parties—Estate—Injunction—Receiver.

1. Land was devised to a married woman for the life of her husband, with a charge thereon for the support and maintenance of her husband during his life; after his death, his minor children to take the fee. Held, that such a minor had not, during the lives of his parents, such an interest in the land as rendered him a necessary party to an action resulting in a verdict and judgment by consent that the claim be a special lien on the crops, to be enforced in three annual installments.

2. The action being against the wife, and having been commenced in a county court which has no equitable jurisdiction, and it being doubtful whether on appeal the superior court had authority to allow an amendment seeking equitable relief, and to enter up the judgment rendered, and it being further doubtful whether execution would not lie against the life-estate, an injunction and the appointment of a receiver for the enforcement of the judgment was properly denied.

Error from superior court, Jasper county: Jenkins, Judge.

The following is the official report: The judge put his refusal of injunction and receiver (which is the judgment excepted to) upon the ground that John K. Goolsby, Jr., the minor child of John K. Goolsby and Julia E. Goolsby, has such an interest in the income of the land conveyed by the deed below set forth as made him a necessary party to an action which resulted in a verdict and judgment taken by consent of the parties, in which it was ordered that the judgment be a special lien on the crops growing and to be grown on the land conveyed by the deed, and be enforced as against such crops in three yearly installments, the gravamen of the present complaint being the failure of the defendants to comply with this judgment; and that the same is void as to the minor, for the reason that the only service upon him was by acknowledgment through the attorney of his guardian ad litem. The deed is as follows: "Georgia, Jasper county. This indenture, made and agreed on this March 30, 1877, between Cardin Goolsby, of said state and county, of the one part, and Julia E. Goolsby, of the same county, of the second part, and the children of the said Cardin, exceptthe said John K., of the third part, witnesseth that, subject to the conditions, and limitations, to be herein mentioned and contained, for the purpose of securing a home and a support for the said John K. and his family, and in consideration of the natural love and affection the said Cardin Goolsby has for his son John K. and his wife, the said Julia E., and also in consideration of the love and affection he has for his other children, and also in consideration of the sum of five dollars to him in hand paid, he, the said Cardin Goolsby, has granted, given, and conveyed, and by...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Mauldin v. Mauldin
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • November 9, 1920
    ...test is: Was the subject-matter of the amendment within the jurisdiction of the ordinary's court? See, in this connection, Watson v. Goolsby, 86 Ga. 805, 13 S. E. 106; Hufbauer v. Jackson, 91 Ga. 301, 18 S. E. 159; Stansell v. Massey, 92 Ga. 436, 17 S. E. 821; Berger v. Saul, 109 Ga. 240, 3......
  • Mauldin v. Mauldin
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • November 9, 1920
    ... ... is: Was the subject-matter of the amendment within the ... jurisdiction of the ordinary's court? See, in this ... connection, Watson v. Goolsby, 86 Ga. 805, 13 S.E ... [105 S.E. 253.] Hufbauer v. Jackson, 91 Ga. 301, 18 S.E. 159; ... Stansell v. Massey, 92 Ga. 436, 17 S.E. 821; ... ...

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