Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448

2018 Georgia Code 44-5-12 | Car Wreck Lawyer

Link to State of Georgia Official Statute 2018 Georgia Code Annotated (sourced from legal.resource.org)
O.C.G.A. 44-5-12 Case Law from Google Scholar Amendments to OCGA 44-5-12

TITLE 44 PROPERTY

Section 5. Acquisition and Loss of Property, 44-5-1 through 44-5-230.

ARTICLE 1 GRANTS FROM STATE

44-5-12. Impeachment of grants; grounds; effect of irregularities or misnomer.

Grants may be impeached before the courts where they are:

  1. Void upon their face;
  2. Issued without authority of law or against a prohibition in a law; or
  3. Issued for property to which the state had no title.

    However, mere irregularities in the proceedings to obtain grants shall not be inquired into nor may a mistake in the name of the grantee be proved by parol.

(Ga. L. 1857, p. 58, § 1; Code 1863, § 2333; Code 1868, § 2330; Code 1873, § 2361; Code 1882, § 2361; Civil Code 1895, § 3220; Civil Code 1910, § 3808; Code 1933, § 85-311.)

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Grant from state cannot be set aside in proceeding to which state is not party. Parker v. Hughes, 25 Ga. 374 (1858) (case distinguished from Dart v. Orme, 41 Ga. 376 (1870), in Calhoun v. Cawley, 104 Ga. 335, 30 S.E. 773 (1898)).

Parol evidence admissible to show proper name if patent ambiguity.

- While a mistake in the name of a grantee of land from the state cannot be proved by parol when it is offered in evidence, yet if there was a patent ambiguity, parol testimony was admissible to show the proper name. Ferrell v. Hurst, 68 Ga. 132 (1881).

Parol evidence admissible where latent ambiguity exists.

- Grant was issued to a certain person. There was no such person. This made a latent ambiguity, and aliunde evidence was admissible to show who was the person meant. Bowen v. Slaughter, 24 Ga. 338, 71 Am. Dec. 135 (1858).

In the case of a latent ambiguity, parol evidence is admissible, not to prove a mistake in the name of the grantee, but to give effect to the grant, by showing the person intended as the grantee. Walker v. Wells, 25 Ga. 141, 71 Am. Dec. 164 (1858); Brooking v. Dearmond, 27 Ga. 58 (1859); Roe v. Doe, 32 Ga. 348 (1861).

Grant cannot be collaterally impeached by proof that the grant was issued through mistake to the wrong person. Martin v. Anderson, 21 Ga. 301 (1857).

Grant issued under "head-right laws".

- Grant under the "head-right laws," which is apparently issued conformably with law, is not open to collateral attack. Houston v. State, 124 Ga. 417, 52 S.E. 757 (1905) ("Head-right Acts," contained in former Code 1895, §§ 3223-3236, were repealed by Ga. L. 1909, pp. 115, 116).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 63A Am. Jur. 2d, Public Lands, §§ 5 et seq., 98, 105, 120 et seq., 124. 72 Am. Jur. 2d, States, Territories, and Dependencies, §§ 66, 67.

C.J.S.

- 73B C.J.S., Public Lands, §§ 268 et seq., 282 et seq.

API Error: Request was throttled. Expected available in 21 seconds.

No results found for Georgia Code 44-5-12.