Almond v. Bentley Gray, Inc.

226 S.E.2d 776, 138 Ga. App. 508, 1976 Ga. App. LEXIS 2212
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedApril 29, 1976
Docket51902
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 226 S.E.2d 776 (Almond v. Bentley Gray, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Almond v. Bentley Gray, Inc., 226 S.E.2d 776, 138 Ga. App. 508, 1976 Ga. App. LEXIS 2212 (Ga. Ct. App. 1976).

Opinion

Stolz, Judge.

1. In this action on account against two partners of a retail clothing business, the trial judge did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff against both defendants and against the appellant on her co-defendant’s cross claim, where the showing on the motion was that the merchandise sued for was ordered by the appellant and delivered while she was still legally a partner (although she was temporarily inactive in the business and intended to withdraw as a partner); and that, subsequent to the filing of the action, the appellant had executed an agreement dissolving the then existing partnership, under which the appellant and a new partner (since withdrawn from the partnership) specifically assumed liability for listed partnership debts, including those which are the subject of the present action.

2. The appellee’s motion to assess damages against the appellant for bringing this case up for delay only (Code § 6-1801) is denied. Such damages are never assessed in doubtful cases where the exceptions are at least colorable. First Am. Acceptance Corp. v. Wheat, 217 Ga. 1 (2) (120 SE2d 330); Turner v. Turner, 191 Ga. 123 (2) (12 SE2d 633). The appellant’s contentions that she was inactive in the business when the goods were accepted and that she would not have executed the dissolution agreement if she had known that all of the partnership debts were not listed thereon (although the one sued on was), are at least colorable.

*509 Submitted March 8, 1976 Decided April 29, 1976. Gettle & Fraser, Sherman Fraser, for appellant. Larry H. Evans, Beck, Goddard, Owen & Murray, Samuel Murray, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

Bell, C. J., and Clark, J., concur.

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

Related

White v. Fidelity National Bank
373 S.E.2d 640 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1988)
Re/Max 100 of Sandy Springs, Inc. v. Tri-continental Leasing Corp.
338 S.E.2d 542 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1985)
Price & Sons Grading Co. v. Associated Iron & Metal Co.
319 S.E.2d 105 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1984)
Piper v. Piper
227 S.E.2d 842 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
226 S.E.2d 776, 138 Ga. App. 508, 1976 Ga. App. LEXIS 2212, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/almond-v-bentley-gray-inc-gactapp-1976.