lawskills
Google
search the Web search LawSkills.com
Did you know you can download our entire database for free?


Resources
[more] 

Georgia Caselaw:
Browse
Greatest Hits

Georgia Code: Browse

(external) Findlaw Georgia Law Resources


This site exists because of donors like you.

Thanks!


Lawskills.com Georgia Caselaw
BARNETT et al. v. DECATUR et al.
SWAIN et al. v. DECATUR et al.
S91G0262.
S91G0263.
WELTNER, Justice.
The Decaturs purchased a one-acre lot of land. They brought an action against their grantor and others in the chain of title claiming breach of warranty of title under OCGA 44-5-62. 1 The Decaturs complained that, at the time of the sale, the configuration of the lot did not comply with county zoning requirements.
The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's denial of partial summary judgment to the Decaturs as to breach of warranty of title, Decatur v. Barnett, 197 Ga. App. 459 (398 SE2d 706) (1990), and we granted certiorari.
1. The contract provided:
Seller warrants that he presently has title to said property, and at the time of closing, he agrees to convey good and marketable title to said property to Purchaser by general warranty deed subject only to (1) zoning ordinances affecting said property; (2) general utility, sewer, and drainage easements of record upon which the dwelling does not encroach; (3) subdivision easements and restrictions of record; and (4) leases, other easements, other restrictions and encumbrances specified in this contract.
Certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Georgia -- 197 Ga. App. 459.
Notes
1  "A general warranty of title against the claims of all persons includes covenants of a right to sell, of quiet enjoyment, and of freedom from encumbrances."
2  The stipulation here in regard to the zoning status of the property did not concern title, and [OCGA 44-5-66] has no applicability to the case. The provision of the contract requiring written notice as to any defect in title would not require written notice as to the nonperformance of a condition of the contract having no relation to title.There is no dispute in the evidence that all parties entered into the contract
Levine & D'Alessio, Caitlin L. Decatur, pro se.
John C. Parker, Debra L. Dalton, for appellants (case no. S91G0263).
Sarah H. Murphy, for appellants (case no. S91G0262).
DECIDED APRIL 11, 1991.
Friday July 25 09:46 CDT


This site exists because of donors like you.

Thanks!


Valid HTML 4.0!

Valid CSS!





Home - Tour - Disclaimer - Privacy - Contact Us
Copyright © 2000,2002,2004 Lawskills.com