Brock v. Yale Mortgage Corporation
Supreme Court of Georgia
700 S.E.2d 583 (2010)

- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Jerry (plaintiff) and Joyce (defendant) Brock, husband and wife, owned property together as tenants in common. Jerry consistently gave Joyce money to make loan payments on the property, but she used the money for other purposes without Jerry’s knowledge and eventually the loan went into default. Joyce did not tell Jerry that the loan went into default. Instead, Joyce procured a new loan from Yale Mortgage Company (Yale) (defendant). In order to obtain the new loan in her name only, Joyce needed to have Jerry transfer his interests in the property to her. So Joyce ordered a blank quitclaim deed and at the closing of the new loan, gave Yale a forged deed purportedly signed by Jerry and transferring his interests to Joyce. Joyce also executed a deed to secure the debt in Yale’s favor. Eventually, Jerry found out about the default, the forged deed, and Joyce’s security deed. Jerry filed for divorce and the parties signed a settlement agreement, in which Joyce transferred her rights in the property to Jerry and agreed to “indemnify and hold [Jerry] harmless from any and all liability . . . arising out of [Joyce’s] failure to pay [her] debt.” Jerry then brought suit against Joyce and Yale, seeking to set aside the deeds and a declaration that he was the owner of the property. The trial court granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Jerry appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Hunstein, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.