W. L. Schautz Co. v. Duncan Hosiery Mills

5 Citing cases

  1. Unified Gov't of Athens-Clarke Co. v. Stiles Apartments, Inc.

    764 S.E.2d 403 (Ga. 2014)

    Reid v. Wilkerson, 222 Ga. 282(2), 149 S.E.2d 700 (1966) (“ ‘Neither laches nor the statute of limitations will run against one in peaceable possession of property under a claim of ownership for delay in resorting to a court of equity to establish his rights.’ [Cit.]”); W.L. Schautz Co. v. Duncan Hosiery Mills, Inc., 218 Ga. 729(1), 130 S.E.2d 496 (1963); Lominick v. Lominick, 213 Ga. 53, 55, 96 S.E.2d 587 (1957); Toombs v. Hilliard, 209 Ga. 755(5)(a), 75 S.E.2d 801 (1953). Accordingly, appellant's assertion that the instant action for injunctive relief fails because of laches or the running of the statute of limitations period is without merit.

  2. Unified Gov't of Athens-Clarke Cnty. v. Stiles Apartments, Inc.

    295 Ga. 829 (Ga. 2014)   Cited 3 times

    Reid v. Wilkerson, 222 Ga. 282(2), 149 S.E.2d 700 (1966) (“ ‘Neither laches nor the statute of limitations will run against one in peaceable possession of property under a claim of ownership for delay in resorting to a court of equity to establish his rights.’ [Cit.]”); W.L. Schautz Co. v. Duncan Hosiery Mills, Inc., 218 Ga. 729(1), 130 S.E.2d 496 (1963) ; Lominick v. Lominick, 213 Ga. 53, 55, 96 S.E.2d 587 (1957) ; Toombs v. Hilliard, 209 Ga. 755(5)(a), 75 S.E.2d 801 (1953). Accordingly, appellant's assertion that the instant action for injunctive relief fails because of laches or the running of the statute of limitations period is without merit.

  3. Brinson v. McMillan

    263 Ga. 802 (Ga. 1994)   Cited 11 times
    Holding that, although appellant did not have the original deed in her possession, " copy of the deed in the record indicates that it was delivered in the presence of the witnesses, was properly witnessed to entitle it to record, and was recorded on September 19, 1977" and "[t]his evidence is sufficient to withstand summary judgment on the issue of delivery"

    This evidence is sufficient to withstand summary judgment on the issue of delivery. See Fuller v. Fuller, 213 Ga. 103 ( 97 S.E.2d 306) (1957); W. L. Schautz Co. v. Duncan Hosiery Mills, 218 Ga. 729 ( 130 S.E.2d 496) (1963). Judgment reversed. All the Justices concur.

  4. Davis v. Johnson

    241 Ga. 436 (Ga. 1978)   Cited 35 times
    Reversing trial court's refusal to reinstate bank's security interest after cancellation

    A judgment creditor does not stand in the position of a bona fide purchaser for value. Burke v. Anderson, 40 Ga. 535 (1869). Accord, e.g., Parker v. Boyd, 208 Ga. 829 (1a) ( 69 S.E.2d 760) (1952); W. L. Schautz Co., Inc. v. Duncan Hosiery Mills, Inc., 218 Ga. 729 (5) ( 130 S.E.2d 496) (1963). The rights of a judgment creditor are inferior to the prior equitable rights of a mortgagee.

  5. Dawson v. Keitt

    232 Ga. 10 (Ga. 1974)   Cited 5 times

    Recordation is prima facie evidence of delivery and, where, as here, the evidence fails to show that, in fact, there was no delivery of the earlier recorded deed, it is entitled to priority. See Daniel v. Stinson, 179 Ga. 701 ( 177 S.E. 590); and W. L. Schautz Co. v. Duncan Hosiery Mills, 218 Ga. 729 (2) ( 130 S.E.2d 496). Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur.