Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448(Ga. L. 1917, p. 108, § 60; Code 1933, § 60-416.)
- Provisions for a caveat by any interested person objecting to any entry, notation, or registry made by the clerk, found in this statute, are not intended to and, as a matter of law cannot, authorize a party to the registration proceeding to go back to the decree of registration. Miller v. Turner, 209 Ga. 255, 71 S.E.2d 517 (1952) (see O.C.G.A. § 44-2-134).
- In cases of fraud, the true owner, if the owner moves within 12 months, has a summary remedy under Ga. L. 1917, p. 108, § 60 (see O.C.G.A. § 44-2-134), or a remedy by plenary suit under Ga. L. 1917, p. 108, § 63 (see O.C.G.A. § 44-2-137). After the expiration of 12 months one can only resort to such plenary suit; but the existence of summary remedy does not preclude such owner from resorting to such plenary remedy, either within or after the expiration of such 12 month period, if one asserts such plenary remedy under the statute within seven years. Rock Run Iron Co. v. Miller, 156 Ga. 136, 118 S.E. 670 (1923).
Motion to cancel notice of lis pendens is not properly classifiable as caveat under O.C.G.A. § 44-2-134. Jay Jenkins Co. v. Financial Planning Dynamics, Inc., 256 Ga. 39, 343 S.E.2d 487 (1986).
Cited in Lankford v. Milhollin, 203 Ga. 491, 47 S.E.2d 70 (1948).
- 66 Am. Jur. 2d, Registration of Land Titles, § 10.
- 76 C.J.S., Registration of Land Titles, § 27.
Total Results: 1
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 1986-05-29
Citation: 343 S.E.2d 487, 256 Ga. 39, 1986 Ga. LEXIS 690
Snippet: cancellation of the lis pendens notice. They cite OCGA § 44-2-134 as authorizing such a caveat. The superior court