Goldgar v. North Fulton Realty Co.

10 Citing cases

  1. Ellerbee v. Hawes

    546 S.E.2d 332 (Ga. Ct. App. 2001)

    Based on the foregoing, the trial court erred in granting Howard's motion for summary judgment. Goldgar v. North Fulton Realty Co., 106 Ga. App. 459 ( 127 S.E.2d 189) (1962).Judgment reversed.

  2. Horn v. Wright

    157 Ga. App. 408 (Ga. Ct. App. 1981)   Cited 6 times
    In Horne, the seller contracted to sell property he did not own, taking his chances on obtaining title prior to the date of confirmation of the sale, or else being liable for damages if he failed to obtain title.

    One may, however, contract to sell property not owned by himself, taking his chances on obtaining title prior to the date of consummation of the sale or responding in damages if he fails to do so. "`Whether or not the seller could have delivered good title on the closing date is not a question which addresses itself to the validity of the contract.' Goldgar v. North Fulton Realty Co., 106 Ga. App. 459, 460 ( 127 S.E.2d 189); Roberts v. J. L. Todd Auction Co., 120 Ga. App. 444, 445 ( 170 S.E.2d 862)." Williams v. Bell, 126 Ga. App. 432, 434 ( 190 S.E.2d 818) (1972).

  3. Kinard Realty v. Evans

    264 S.E.2d 282 (Ga. Ct. App. 1979)   Cited 3 times

    See Birchmore v. Upchurch, 78 Ga. App. 233 ( 50 S.E.2d 857), involving a listing contract which was made subject to an existing option on the property. Compare Goldgar v. North Fulton Realty Co., 106 Ga. App. 459 (1) ( 127 S.E.2d 189), and Deal v. Mountain Lake Realty, Inc., 132 Ga. App. 118 (4b) ( 207 S.E.2d 560), involving listing contracts which were unconditional even though the person desiring to sell the property did not have the right to sell the property at the time the contract was made. Since the listing contract was expressly conditioned on appellee's acquiring the right to sell the property by foreclosure or otherwise, and since this condition did not materialize, the contract was lacking in mutuality and was unenforceable.

  4. Southland Corp. v. Garren

    138 Ga. App. 246 (Ga. Ct. App. 1976)   Cited 8 times
    In Southland Corp. v. Garren, 138 Ga. App. 246 (225 S.E.2d 920) (1976), the court found that a statement to a third party that an employee who was "fired for shortages" does not, as a matter of law, impute a crime punishable by law.

    Baugham, 74 Ga. App. 802 (1) ( 41 S.E.2d 581); Woolf v. Colonial Stores, Inc., 76 Ga. App. 565 ( 46 S.E.2d 620). This rule is a corollary to the rule that the doctrine of respondent superior does not apply to slander or oral defamation. Lanham v. Keys, 31 Ga. App. 635 ( 121 S.E. 856); Goldgar v. North Fulton Realty Co., 106 Ga. App. 459 ( 127 S.E.2d 189); Southern R. Co. v. Chambers, 126 Ga. 104 ( 55 S.E. 37). Yet, where libel is concerned it must be shown that the servant who published the libel "was acting within the scope of his employment or in the prosecution of the master's business" or "that the nature of the employee's service was such that his authority to perform the act on behalf of his employer could be legitimately inferred." See Rivers v. Mathews, 96 Ga. App. 546 (2) ( 100 S.E.2d 637), a case where an alleged written libel was published orally, and the court applied both slander and libel rules and held no cause of action was shown under either.

  5. Deal v. Mountain Lake

    207 S.E.2d 560 (Ga. Ct. App. 1974)   Cited 5 times

    His inability to convey a good title to the whole of the fee because his wife owned a one-half undivided interest which she would not convey does not affect the validity of his contract to convey a good and merchantable title to the whole fee or relieve him from liability for damages for his failure to do so. Goldgar v. North Fulton Realty Co., 106 Ga. App. 459 ( 127 S.E.2d 189); Roberts v. J. L. Todd Auction Co., 120 Ga. App. 444 ( 170 S.E.2d 862); Higgins v. Kenney, 159 Ga. 736 ( 126 S.E. 827); Barnett v. Adams, 164 Ga. 18 ( 137 S.E. 554). This is true even though specific performance would lie only as to the one-half undivided interest vested in the seller.

  6. Williams v. Bell

    190 S.E.2d 818 (Ga. Ct. App. 1972)   Cited 13 times

    Northington-Munger-Pratt Co. v. Farmers Gin c. Co., 119 Ga. 851 ( 47 S.E. 200, 100 ASR 210); Sanders v. Allen, 135 Ga. 173 ( 68 S.E. 1102); Broadwell v. Kiker, 28 Ga. App. 279 ( 111 S.E. 62). "Whether or not the seller could have delivered good title on the closing date is not a question which addresses itself to the validity of the contract." Goldgar v. North Fulton Realty Co., 106 Ga. App. 459, 460 ( 127 S.E.2d 189); Roberts v. J. L. Todd Auction Co., 120 Ga. App. 444, 445 ( 170 S.E.2d 862). Accordingly, we hold the absence of title at the time of the making of the contract does not provide the basis for a fraudulent conversion. The motion to dismiss Count 1 as failing to state a claim for relief should have been sustained.

  7. Smith Realty Company v. Hubbard

    183 S.E.2d 506 (Ga. Ct. App. 1971)   Cited 2 times

    Under these circumstances the real estate agent would be entitled to his commissions under the terms of the contract. Goldgar v. North Fulton Realty Co., 106 Ga. App. 459 ( 127 S.E.2d 189); Roberts v. J. L. Todd Auction Co., 120 Ga. App. 444 ( 170 S.E.2d 862). The grant of the defendant's motion to dismiss on the ground that the complaint failed to state a claim on which relief could be granted was error.

  8. Roberts v. J. L. Todd Auction Company

    170 S.E.2d 862 (Ga. Ct. App. 1969)   Cited 6 times

    " Northington-Munger-Pratt Co. v. Farmers Gin c. Co., 119 Ga. 851 ( 47 S.E. 200). "Whether or not the seller could have delivered good title on the closing date is not a question which addresses itself to the validity of the contract." Goldgar v. North Fulton Realty Co., 106 Ga. App. 459, 460 ( 127 S.E.2d 189). Todd had earned its commission or was entitled to the equivalent in damages by doing all that it was required to do under the agreement as modified, and could do under the circumstances, the only remaining obligation being that of Roberts to provide the necessary conveyance. See Rountree v. Todd, 210 Ga. 226, 229 ( 78 S.E.2d 499); Smith v. Tatum, 140 Ga. 719 (1) ( 79 S.E. 775). Accordingly, the trial judge properly directed a verdict in favor of the plaintiff for the amount of the commission.

  9. Diversified c. Corp. v. Clayton McLendon

    120 Ga. App. 455 (Ga. Ct. App. 1969)   Cited 12 times

    Code Ann. ยง 84-1415. These fairly ambiguous requirements were met (prior to certain amendments) by the decision in Goldgar v. North Fulton Realty Co., 106 Ga. App. 459 (2) ( 127 S.E.2d 189), where it was held that the license was both a corporate and an individual license. Such license as renewed, appears only in the form of a pocket card which is carried by the broker.

  10. Allen v. Arrow Contracting Co.

    138 S.E.2d 600 (Ga. Ct. App. 1964)   Cited 6 times
    In Allen v. Arrow Contracting Co., 110 Ga. App. 369 (138 S.E.2d 600) (1964), the lien claim in the name of "Jack A. Spielberg, trading as Arrow Contracting Co., Inc."

    Parker v. Kilgo, 109 Ga. App. 698, 700 ( 137 S.E.2d 333). See Clark Bros. v. Wyche, 126 Ga. 24 ( 54 S.E. 909); Goldgar v. North Fulton Realty Co., 106 Ga. App. 459, 463 ( 127 S.E.2d 189). 2.