Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

151 Ga. 367

DeLay v. Latimer

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided April 13, 1921

Supreme Court of Georgia · decided 1921-04-13

Mortgage foreclosure. Before Judge Bell. Fulton superior court. May 19, 1920. W. Carroll Latimer, as assignee of a mortgage on realty dated in 1899, sought to foreclose it in equity against the mortgagor, J. M. DeLay, a non-resident of the State, making the latter’s wife, L. Y. DeLay, eodefendant.

Relies on Bower v. Cohen · Pearson v. Courson

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1921-04-13

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently February 1948

4 state decisions

20192119301940decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Fish, C. J.

¶1(After stating the foregoing facts.) The Civil Code (1910), § 5688, provides, that when two or more persons are sued in the same action, either on a contract or for a tort, the plaintiff may amend his declaration by striking out one or more of such de*370fendants, and proceed against the remaining defendant or defendants, if there is no other legal difficulty in the case. The defendant dismissed from the suit set up various grounds in her original answer and the amendment thereto why the petitioner’s claim to foreclose the mortgage should be denied, but she prayed for no affirmative relief, either against the plaintiff or her codefendant, and therefore no legal difficulty is presented why the petitioner should not exercise his statutory right to discontinue the case as to her by having her name stricken as a defendant. Bower v. Cohen, 126 Ga. 35, 37 (54 S. E. 918); Pearson v. Courson, 129 Ga. 656 (5), 660 (59 S. E. 907).

¶2As the defendant in her answer prayed for no relief, the fact that the suit to foreclose the mortgage may in the circumstances be a proceeding in rem does not affect the ruling made.

¶3Judgment aj/irmed.

All the Justices concur.
/151/ga/367 · .json · Public domain