VINEVILLE CAPITAL GROUP, LLC v. McCOOK
329 Ga. App. 790
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- Two separate deeds to secure debt encumber the same Macon property; one to McCook, Jr. (2002) and another to Regions Bank (2005).
- The McCook deed contains habendum language “forever, in FEE SIMPLE,” and records indicate the debt is a demand note; no fixed maturity is stated.
- OCGA § 44-14-80 (a) (2) governs when title reverts if the debt’s maturity is not stated; requires an affirmative statement in the record to invoke a 20-year period.
- As of 2009, seven years had passed since conveyance under the McCook deed, with no foreclosure or cancellation, raising the question of whether the 20-year period applies.
- Vineville filed to foreclose; McCook, Sr. sought to enjoin foreclosure and asserted the McCook deed remained valid with first priority; trial court found a genuine dispute about the intended 20-year reversion.
- The Georgia Court of Appeals reversed, holding the 7-year reversion applies because there is no affirmative statement in the deed showing an intent to create a perpetual security interest.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether parol evidence can determine the 20-year reversionary intent | Vineville; parol evidence should not be used to interpret the deed | McCook, Sr.; intent may be proven to show perpetual interest | Parol evidence not admissible to create 20-year reversion |
| Whether the McCook deed contains an affirmative statement of perpetual intent | McCook, Sr. contends implied perpetual language suffices | McCook, Sr.; deed language like ‘forever’ indicates perpetual desire | No affirmative statement; 7-year reversion applies |
| Whether the habendum clause language demonstrates perpetual security | Foregoing language should be interpreted as perpetual | Habendum shows estate duration, not security interest; not affirmative | Language expresses duration of the estate, not an affirmative perpetual intent |
| Whether the security deed's overall language shows an intent to invoke 20-year reversion | There is some indication of perpetual intent | No clauses show affirmative statement of perpetual security | No affirmative statement found; seven-year revert applies |
| Remainder of injunction issues moot given ruling on reversion | Unresolved injunction issues | Issues moot after ruling | Mooted by Division 1 ruling |
Key Cases Cited
- Penny v. McBride, 282 Ga. App. 590 (2006) (review standard on motion to dismiss; construed in plaintiff’s favor on pleadings)
- Second Refuge Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ v. Lollar, 282 Ga. 721 (2007) (extrinsic evidence admitted only where deed is ambiguous)
- Lollar, 282 Ga. 724 (2007) (deed interpretation; de novo review of construction)
- Newton v. Lawson, 313 Ga. App. 29 (2011) (statutory precedence over general rules; specific statute governs 20-year reversion)
- Shoaf v. Bland, 208 Ga. 709 (1952) (whole instrument construed to give effect to entire deed)