History
  • No items yet
midpage
Lane v. Head
148 Ga. 650
Ga.
1919
Check Treatment
Hill, J.

In an action of complaint for land, the petition alleged that the plaintiff and the defendant claimed under a common grantor. On the trial a deed was offered by the defendant from the common grantor, in which the only description of the property was, “land lying and being in Higdon’s Addition in Tallapoosa, Ga., being lots two and four in said addition.” In connection with the deed the defendant also introduced a map of Higdon’s Addition, which disclosed that there were more than one lot in that addition designated by number two, and more than one lot designated by number four. It did not affirmatively appear that the common grantor did not own other lots in the “Higdon Addition” bearing such numbers. Held:

1. It was erroneous to admit the deed in evidence over the objection that the description of the property was insufficient. King v. Sears, 91 Ga. 577 (2), 586 (18 S. E. 830).

2. Other grounds of the motion for new trial show no cause for reversal.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur. Complaint for land. Before Judge Bartlett. Haralson superior court. May 11, 1918. Griffith & Matthews, for plaintiff. Lloyd Thomas and G. B. Hutchens, for defendant.

Case Details

Case Name: Lane v. Head
Court Name: Supreme Court of Georgia
Date Published: Jan 14, 1919
Citation: 148 Ga. 650
Docket Number: No. 1017
Court Abbreviation: Ga.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.