TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Deloach v. Delk

Deloach v. Delk, 47 S.E. 204 (Ga. 1904)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Georgia · State Highest Courts
Decided
March 30, 1904
Judges
Turner
Citations
47 S.E. 204119 Ga. 8841904 Ga. LEXIS 392
Summary
Certiorari. Before Judge Evans. Tattnall superior court. May 4, 1903.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Turner

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Turner, J.

1. 'Where, under the terms of a contract between an owner of land and another who agrees to cultivate it on shares, the relation of landlord and cropper is created, the title to all crops grown on the land remains in the landlord until there has been an actual division and settlement whereby he receives in full his share of the produce. Civil Code, § 3131; Wadley v. Williams, 75 Ga. 272 ; Almand v. Scott, 80 Ga. 95. That the cropper furnishes the labor necessary to the making of the crops, and is to receive a portion thereof as compensation for his services, does not place him in the situation of a partner having an undivided interest in the product of his labor. Padgett v. Ford, 117 Ga. 510 , and cit. So, if the owner of the land wrongfully refuses to comply with his obligations in the premises, the remedy of the cropper is to assert a laborer’s lien on the crops grown by him (McElmurray v. Turner, 86 Ga. 215 ); for he can not maintain against the landlord an action of trover, the title to the crops being in the latter. Bryant v. Pugh, 86 Ga. 525, 529 .

2. In no view of the evidence in the present case was the plaintiff entitled to prevail in the action of bail-trover brought against the defendants ; and this being so, the court below erred in not setting aside, on certiorari, the verdict returned against them in the city court wherein the suit was instituted.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 17 cases

View all citing references →
1904: 11905: 11910: 11912: 31916: 11921: 11922: 21923: 31925: 11927: 21932: 119042026peak 1912 · 3

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Harley v. Davis66 S.E. 1102 (Ga. Ct. App. 1910)
  2. Parks v. Langley88 S.E. 695 (Ga. Ct. App. 1916)
  3. Ellis, McKinnon & Brown v. Hopps118 S.E. 583 (Ga. Ct. App. 1923)
  4. Vinson v. State52 S.E. 79 (Ga. 1905)
  5. Hall & Ham v. Stone75 S.E. 140 (Ga. Ct. App. 1912)
  6. Smart v. Hill116 S.E. 66 (Ga. Ct. App. 1922)

Most recent

  1. Kelley v. Moody167 S.E. 101 (Ga. 1932)
  2. Comar Oil Co. v. Richter1927 OK 357, 260 P. 60
  3. Atlanta Trust Co. v. Oliver-McDonald Co.136 S.E. 824 (Ga. Ct. App. 1927)
  4. Folds v. Harris129 S.E. 664 (Ga. Ct. App. 1925)
  5. Collier v. Pritchett118 S.E. 444 (Ga. Ct. App. 1923)
  6. Ellis, McKinnon & Brown v. Hopps118 S.E. 583 (Ga. Ct. App. 1923)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 5

DepthCaseCited by
McElmurray v. Turner, 12 S.E. 359 (Ga. 1890) 29
McAndrew v. Irish-Am. Bank, 43 S.E. 858 (Ga. 1903) 15
Almand v. Scott & Co., 4 S.E. 892 (Ga. 1888) 13
Wadley v. Williams, 75 Ga. 272 (1886) 8
Bryant v. Pugh, 12 S.E. 927 (Ga. 1891) 3

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list