Case Name: Byrom et al., trustees, v. Riley et al.
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia
Jurisdiction: Georgia
Decision Date: 1922-11-25
Citations: 154 Ga. 580
Docket Number: No. 3044
Parties: Byrom et al., trustees, v. Riley et al.
Judges: All the Justices eoneur.
Reporter: Georgia Reports
Volume: 154
Pages: 580–580

Head Matter:
Byrom et al., trustees, v. Riley et al.
No. 3044.
November 25, 1922.
Complaint for land. Before Judge Irwin. Douglas superior court. September 13, 1921..
G. B. Byrom et al., as trustees of the Methodist Protestant Church Colored, at Douglasville, brought suit against Ed. Riley and J. S. Abercrombie, to recover a certain lot of land in the town of Douglasville. The defendant Riley filed no defense; but Abercrombie filed an answer averring that he purchased the land, of which he was in possession, from one Green Barnwell, who was a trustee of the above-named church at the time, and that he paid, him the sum of $100 for 50x200 feet of land off the east side of the lot which was described. Abercrombie built a house upon the land worth about $300, and remained in adverse possession of it for more than seven years from the execution of the deed to him. The jury returned a verdict for the defendants. The plaintiffs made a motion for new trial, which was overruled, and they excepted.
D. 8. Strickland and J. 8. James, for plaintiffs.
J. B. Hutcheson, for defendants.

Opinion:
Hill, J.
1. "A writing which upon its face professes to pass title to realty, but which does not do so, either from a want of title in the person making it, or from a defect in the conveyance, but which defines the property purported to be conveyed, is sufficient to constitute color of title. Street v. Collier, 118 Ga. 470 (45 S. E. 294)." Turner v. Neisler, 141 Ga. 27 (6) (80 S. E. 461); Beverly v. Burke, 9 Ga. 440 (2), 443 (54 Am. D. 351).
2. Adverse possession of land, under written evidence of title, foi seven years will give a title by prescription. Civil Code (1910), § 4169.
3. The evidence authorized, if it did not demand, the verdict returned in favor of the defendants,
4. The charges of the court complained of, and the rulings on the admissibility of evidence, do not require a reversal.
Judgment affirmed.
All the Justices eoneur.