midpage

Ray v. KinchenRay v. Kinchen

Supreme Court of Georgia
Aug 17, 1928
No. 6667
Reporters:
, ,
Before:
Gilbert
Gilbert, J.

1. The right of plaintiff to the relief sought is based upon her claim of “virtual” adoption. ‍‌​​​​​​​​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌​​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‍An oral contract of adoption must be definite and specific, based upon a sufficient legal consideration, and the proof of such contract must be clear, strong and satisfactory. Lansdell v. Lansdell, 144 Ga. 571 (87 S. E. 782); Pair v. Pair, 147 Ga. 754 (95 S. E. 295) ‍‌​​​​​​​​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌​​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‍; Bell v. Elrod, 150 Ga. 709 (105 S. E. 241). And see Crum v. Fendig, 157 Ga. 528, 530 (121 S. E. 825) ; Ezell v. Mobley, 160 Ga. 872, 876 (129 S. E. 532).

2. On the issue of administration of the estate in a court of equity, the evidence would not ‍‌​​​​​​​​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌​​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‍support a verdict for the plaintiff. No facts were shown authorizing a court of equity to interfere with the court of ordinary, as prayed.

3. The evidence authorized the verdict. It is at least doubtful whether ‍‌​​​​​​​​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌​​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‍under the evidence a different verdict would have been authorized. The newly discovered evidence was cumulative, and was not of such character as would probably produce a different result on another trial. None of the grounds ‍‌​​​​​​​​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌​​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‍of the motion for new trial show error.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices eoneur. William B. Kent, for plaintiff. W. S. Mann, for defendants.

Case Details

Case Name: Ray v. Kinchen
Court Name: Supreme Court of Georgia
Date Published: Aug 17, 1928
Citations: 166 Ga. 788; 144 S.E. 317; 1928 Ga. LEXIS 403; No. 6667
Docket Number: No. 6667
Court Abbreviation: Ga.
Log In