Adder Machine Co. v. Hawes

111 S.E. 188, 152 Ga. 826, 1922 Ga. LEXIS 289
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided February 21, 1922·No. No. 2620·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

Fish, C. J.

As appears from the first question propounded, the action of trover and bail, by amendment of the petition by the plaintiff, was converted into a plain suit of trover for the recovery of the property itself, wherein no recovery was sought for hire, or for the value of the property. As stated in the question, the Civil Code (1910), § 4015, provides: “No suit to recover a debt due by the decedent shall be commenced against the administrator until the expiration of twelve months from his qualification,” etc. A trover suit for the recovery alone of the property therein mentioned is not a “suit to recover a debt due by the decedent/'’ and it is only where the suit is to recover a debt that the exemption applies. See Lanfair v. Thompson, 112 Ga. 487 (2) (37 S. E. 717); Redford v. Lloyd, 147 Ga. 145 (93 S. E. 296). We therefore answer the first question in the negative.

No answer is required to the second question, as it is predicated upon the hypothesis that the first question is answered in the affirmative.

All the Justices concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Adder Machine Co. v. Hawes, 111 S.E. 188, 152 Ga. 826, 1922 Ga. LEXIS 289 (Ga. 1922).

111 S.E. 188 (Adder Machine Co. v. Hawes) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Byrd v. Riggs
73 S.E.2d 35 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1952)
Commercial Bank v. Pharr
43 S.E.2d 439 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1947)
Terry v. Fickett
33 S.E.2d 163 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1945)
Sharpe v. Autry
188 S.E. 354 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1936)
Jones v. Womack
187 S.E. 285 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1936)
Atkinson v. Universal Credit Co.
180 S.E. 926 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1935)
Chapman v. Hamilton National Bank
179 S.E. 650 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1935)
Price v. Nehi Inc.
174 S.E. 722 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1934)