From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Petty v. Lee

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Oct 1, 1974
209 S.E.2d 239 (Ga. Ct. App. 1974)

Opinion

49475.

ARGUED JULY 1, 1974.

DECIDED OCTOBER 1, 1974.

Action for damages. Fulton Superior Court. Before Judge Tidwell.

Thomas A. Bowman, for appellant.

James L. Mayson, H. G. McBrayer, Jr., for appellees.


In this case plaintiff sought recovery for damages based on fraud and deceit arising from the sale of a house. The defendants are the seller and the real estate agent. The plaintiff at trial failed to establish any wilful misrepresentation by either of the defendants as to the condition of the house and in particular the roof which was found to be defective by plaintiff after the closing of the sale. Further, there was no evidence that the defective roof had been concealed so as to deceive and mislead the plaintiff. Thus essential elements for recovery on account of fraud and deceit were not shown by the plaintiff's evidence. Code § 105-302; Blanchard v. West, 115 Ga. App. 814 ( 156 S.E.2d 164). The trial judge correctly granted defendants a directed verdict.

Judgment affirmed. Quillian and Clark, JJ., concur.

ARGUED JULY 1, 1974 — DECIDED OCTOBER 1, 1974.


Summaries of

Petty v. Lee

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Oct 1, 1974
209 S.E.2d 239 (Ga. Ct. App. 1974)
Case details for

Petty v. Lee

Case Details

Full title:PETTY v. LEE et al

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Oct 1, 1974

Citations

209 S.E.2d 239 (Ga. Ct. App. 1974)
209 S.E.2d 239

Citing Cases

Flint-Ocmulgee Development Corporation v. Liles

Under the evidence, the plaintiff had actual knowledge of the road's status and cannot now complain. See Code…