DocketNumber: 31552.
Citation Numbers: 42 S.E.2d 383, 75 Ga. App. 119
Judges: SUTTON, P. J.
Filed Date: 4/10/1947
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 1/12/2023
1. A court of ordinary has no jurisdiction to try and determine conflicting claims of ownership of property, arising between a widow applying for the setting apart of a year's support and a person asserting title adversely to the estate of her deceased husband.
(a). Nor does the superior court, in such a case on appeal from the court of ordinary, have jurisdiction to try and determine conflicting claims of ownership of property arising therein.
2. When a trial court, in a case over which it has no jurisdiction as to subject-matter, renders any judgment therein except one of dismissal, this court will reverse the same whether exception to it for want of jurisdiction in the court below be taken in the bill of exceptions or not.
On the trial in the superior court, the instrument executed by Laz McDaniel to O. A. Selman was allowed in evidence, over the objections of the widow, and, there being no further evidence, the judge directed a verdict in favor of the objection to the award made by the appraisers. The widow filed a motion for a new trial, which she later amended by adding two special grounds. The exception here is to the judgment overruling the amended motion for a new trial.
1. The trial judge directed a verdict in favor of Selman on the ground that the instrument executed by Laz McDaniel was a security deed and that the title to the land set apart by the appraisers to the widow was not in the estate of Laz McDaniel at the time the award was made by the appraisers. That was the view taken by the ordinary when he sustained the objection to the award of the appraisers setting apart the year's support. "The court of ordinary and the superior court on appeal from the court of ordinary were without jurisdiction to try the issue of title."Hendrix v. Hendrix,
Under the law applicable to this case, the court of ordinary and *Page 121
the superior court on appeal from the court of ordinary were without jurisdiction to hear and determine the issue as to the title to the land described in the award made by the appraisers, and claimed by O. A. Selman. When a trial court, in a case over which it has, as to subject-matter, no jurisdiction, renders therein any judgment except one of dismissal, this court will reverse the same whether exception to it be taken in the bill of exceptions or not. Kirkman v. Gillespie,
2. Accordingly, the judgment appealed from in the present case must be reversed.
Judgment reversed. Felton and Parker, JJ., concur.