HAMILTON STATE BANK v. NELSON et al.
S14A1892
Supreme Court of Georgia
February 16, 2015
769 SE2d 317
BLACKWELL, Justice.
Paul L. Howard, Jr., District Attorney, Paige Reese Whitaker, Lenny I. Krick, Assistant District Attorneys, Samuel S. Olens, Attorney General, Patricia B. Attaway Burton, Deputy Attorney General, Paula K. Smith, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Rochelle W. Gordon, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
BLACKWELL, Justice.
Jimmy R. Nelson and Dolph Nelson, Jr. (the “Nelsons“) are members of Nelson and Nelson Building Acct., LLC (the “LLC“) and shareholders of Nelson‘s Appliances and Home Furnishings, Inc. (the “Corporation“). The Nelsons executed promissory notes in favor of Hamilton State Bank (the “Bank“), and to secure the repayment of those notes, the Bank obtained a security interest in real property owned by the LLC and the Corporation, upon which the Nelsons operated an appliance and furniture store. The Bank also obtained a security interest in the store‘s accounts receivable, inventory, furniture, and fixtures. In two separate actions, the Bank obtained judgments against the Nelsons on the notes in the approximate amount of $2.9 million each, and those judgments apparently are the subject of two appeals that are currently pending in the Court of Appeals. Based on the terms of the security deeds and security agreements, the involvement of
Most important, the Bank does not challenge the denial of a receivership. Rather, the Bank argues only that it does not want immediate possession of the store and that the trial court was without authority to order the Bank to accept possession. Nowhere in the order, however, does the trial court require the Bank to accept possession. See Gwinnett County v. McManus, 294 Ga. 702, 704 (755 SE2d 720) (2014). The trial court only directed the Nelsons to tender possession of the property to the Bank. Under Georgia law, the mere tender of possession to another does not work a transfer of possession unless and until possession is accepted by the transferee. See Smiway, Inc. v. Dept. of Transp., 178 Ga. App. 414, 418 (6) (343 SE2d 497) (1986) (quoting Lamb v. Gorman, 16 Ga. App. 663, 663 (3) (85 SE 981) (1915) in the context of a landlord-tenant relationship). Cf. Ledsinger v. Burke, 113 Ga. 74, 77 (1) (38 SE 313) (1901). To the extent the trial court erred in ordering the Nelsons to tender possession, the trial court never required the Bank to take possession, and so, any such error could not have harmed the Bank. Consequently, the Bank cannot be heard to complain about the order, which was directed only to the Nelsons. See Martin v. Hendon, 224 Ga. 221, 222-223 (3) (160 SE2d 893) (1968); Rush v. Southern Property Mgmt., 121 Ga. App. 360, 361 (2) (a) (173 SE2d 744) (1970).
Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur.
DECIDED FEBRUARY 16, 2015.
Balch & Bingham, Jamie L. Cohen, Matthew B. Ames, Walter E. Jones, for appellant.
Howick, Westfall, McBryan & Kaplan, Louis G. McBryan, Virginia B. Bogue, for appellees.
WILLIAMS v. THE STATE.
S14A1937
Supreme Court of Georgia
769 SE2d 318
HINES, Presiding Justice.
HINES, Presiding Justice.
Frankie Williams appeals the denial of his motion for new trial and his conviction and sentence for malice murder in connection with the fatal drive-by shooting of Jerry Bodiford, Jr. He challenges the sufficiency and weight of the evidence of his guilt. Finding the challenge to be without merit, we affirm.1
Williams contends that the evidence was insufficient to show that he directly committed the murder or was a party to it, and, as he did in his motion for new trial, he maintains that the verdicts were