Hagan v. Hagan
Hagan v. Hagan
Opinion of the Court
Mrs. Maggie Hagan, on January 19, 1927, tiled her petition for injunction against Horace Hagan and G. E. Lee, administrators of the estate of Dock Hagan, deceased. After answer by defendants and hearing thereon, the judge of the superior court of Bulloch County, presiding, passed an order denying the injunction on condition that the defendant administrators would, within eighteen days from the date of signing the order, have a certain deed from the administrators to Mrs. Hagan, the plaintiff, attested or acknowledged so- as to legally admit it to record, or make to Mrs. Hagan a deed legally conveying the tract of land in question. The order provided that should the administrators fail to comply with the order, then the temporary restraining order be continued and the defendants be enjoined from further proceeding to sell the land described in’ the petition. The deed referred to had been properly executed by one of the two administrators. One of them, G. E. Lee, was a resident of the State of Florida, and his signature to the deed had not been properly attested. On April 5, 1927, the petitioner by amendment renewed her application for injunction, insisting that the order had not been complied with, and that the administrators were proceeding to enforce an execution against her by a sale of the land in question, in violation of the terms of the order passed by the court. The administrators answered, averring that they had complied with the order. Upon considering the pleadings, and evidence submitted, the court refused the injunction.
“Sworn to and subscribed before me this January 34, 1937. Wm, PI. Goff, Notary Public. My com. exp. 5-15-1938. (Seal).”
We think this was a substantial compliance with section 4303 of the Civil Code, relating to the attestation of deeds executed out of this State. As we have said, this deed acknowledged by Lee was not tendered until March 9, which was after the eighteen days within which the deed was to be delivered to petitioner; but the judge was authorized to hold that this was a substantial compliance with his order as originally granted. No exception to the order as originally granted was filed by either party; and consequently, the defendants having complied with the terms of that order, the judge was authorized to refuse the injunction which the petitioner sought.'
Judgment affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- HAGAN v. HAGAN, administrator
- Status
- Published