Norman S. Fletcher

In Eardley v. McGreevy, a property owner appealed a trial court ruling that denied an implied easement over a neighbor's land for use of a gravel drive shown on an unrecorded plat. The case arose in a quiet title proceeding after the plaintiff purchased a one-acre parcel that had direct frontage on a public road (Jett Road) but claimed an easement based on the plat and prior use. The Georgia Supreme Court affirmed the denial, holding that an implied easement requires necessity for access, which was absent here because the property could reach the public road without unreasonable difficulty. The court further ruled that no easement arose from the plat because it was neither recorded nor referenced in the deed, and an unrecorded plat alone cannot bind subsequent owners or create an easement under Georgia law.

property

The case Masters v. Redwine involved a dispute over an oral agreement to exchange parcels of land between Fred Masters and David Redwine. Masters sought specific performance of the contract after Redwine refused to sign the deed for his portion of the exchange. The Georgia Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals, holding that the jury's verdict in favor of Masters was supported by sufficient evidence, including partial performance by Masters and acceptance by Redwine, which satisfied the statute of frauds requirements despite the lack of a complete written description. The court reasoned that focusing solely on the written agreement was erroneous and that extrinsic evidence like surveys and deeds could establish the property details.

property

In Wilson v. Lane, Floyd Wilson filed a caveat challenging the testamentary capacity of Jewel Jones Greer when she executed her 1997 will, which was offered for probate by executrix Katherine Lane and distributed her property equally among mostly relatives plus her caregiver. A jury found Greer lacked capacity, but the trial court granted Lane's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. The Court held that the propounders established a presumption of capacity through testimony from the drafting attorney and others that Greer was competent and chose her beneficiaries rationally, while the caveators presented only evidence of eccentricity, age, peculiar habits, a later guardianship petition, and equivocal medical references to dementia that did not show Greer was unable to form a decided and rational desire regarding the disposition of her property. The opinion emphasized that neither advancing age, weakness of intellect, nor eccentricity is inconsistent with testamentary capacity under Georgia law, and insufficient evidence existed to overcome the presumption or support the jury verdict.

family lawproperty

The case involved Quentin Lamar Wright's conviction for felony murder based on the shooting death of a cab driver during an alleged robbery attempt, with key testimony from several accomplices and related witnesses. Wright appealed on the ground that the trial court erred by granting the State's motion in limine and barring cross-examination of those witnesses about their juvenile adjudications, probationary status, or pending cases. The Georgia Supreme Court reversed the conviction, ruling that the Sixth Amendment right to confrontation entitles a defendant to inquire into a witness's current probation or open juvenile matters to reveal possible bias or motive to testify favorably for the State. The court found the record adequate to raise the issue for three witnesses, rejected distinctions based on commitment versus probation, and concluded the error was not harmless because witness credibility formed the core of the prosecution's case.

criminal lawprocedure

In Ross v. State, the defendant was convicted by a Fulton County jury of malice murder and related charges, including possession of a weapon by a convicted felon, based on evidence that he shot and killed a man at his estranged wife's home. Ross argued on appeal that the trial court erred by refusing his offer to stipulate to his status as a felon and instead admitting the name and nature of his prior conviction for enticing a minor. The Georgia Supreme Court adopted the reasoning of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Old Chief v. United States, holding that admitting the details of the prior offense was error because its probative value was substantially outweighed by the risk of unfair prejudice in proving a status-based offense. However, the court concluded the error was harmless given the overwhelming other evidence of Ross's guilt and therefore affirmed the convictions.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved Edith Tillyne Sammons, who was convicted by a jury of murdering her estranged husband after claiming self-defense due to battered person syndrome. On appeal, Sammons argued that she was improperly excluded from a critical stage of the trial when the court replaced a juror following an ex parte discussion without her presence or consent. The Georgia Supreme Court reversed the conviction, holding that the defendant's constitutional right to be present at all proceedings, including those involving changes to jury composition, was violated, and she did not waive or acquiesce in this absence. The court mandated a new trial because prejudice is presumed from such a denial of rights.

criminal lawprocedure