Ambrose v. E. F. Hutton & Co.

246 S.E.2d 423, 146 Ga. App. 403, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 2377
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedJune 23, 1978
Docket55610
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 246 S.E.2d 423 (Ambrose v. E. F. Hutton & Co.) 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
Ambrose v. E. F. Hutton & Co., 246 S.E.2d 423, 146 Ga. App. 403, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 2377 (Ga. Ct. App. 1978).

Opinion

Birdsong, Judge.

Appellee sued the appellant for a balance due on a commodities account. Appellant denied owing the *404 account. Appellee made a motion for summary judgment attaching to the motion an affidavit of the vice-president and resident manager. The affidavit had attached thereto "point out” sheets showing an indebtedness of $1,716.81. Appellant filed an affidavit objecting to the statements in the affidavit referring to "computer entries,” "proper credits given,” "no lawful set offs” and a denial of indebtedness. The trial court granted appellee’s motion for summary judgment and ordered that appellee recover from appellant the sum of $1,716.81 plus costs of court.

Argued April 10, 1978 Decided June 23, 1978. Roberts, Roberts & Rainwater, Guy Velpoe Roberts, for appellant. Hutton & Friend, William D. Friend, for appellee.

Appellant appeals the grant of summary judgment insisting there was an unresolved issue of fact in the case. Held:

1. The statement of account attached to appellee’s affidavit was admissible as a business record pursuant to Code Ann. § 38-711: Smith v. Bank of the South, 141 Ga. App. 114 (232 SE2d 629); Vaughn & Co. v. Saul, 143 Ga. App. 74, 79 (237 SE2d 622).

2. The affidavit of the appellee pierced the general denial of the appellant and the appellant by his affidavit having failed to set forth specific facts which show there is a genuine issue, the grant of summary judgment was proper. Continental Carriers v. Seaboard C. L. R. Co., 129 Ga. App. 889 (201 SE2d 826); Young v. Climatrol Southeast Dist. Corp., 141 Ga. App. 235 (233 SE2d 54).

Judgment affirmed.

Bell, C. J., and Shulman, J., concur.

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

Related

Sweet Water Tree Farm, Inc. v. J. Frank Schmidt & Son, Inc.
651 S.E.2d 787 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2007)
Kinney v. American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance
377 S.E.2d 900 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1989)
Carlos Jones Construction Co. v. Federal Deposit Insurance
315 S.E.2d 458 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1984)
Vickers v. Chrysler Credit Corp.
280 S.E.2d 842 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1981)
Clark v. Assurance Company of America
275 S.E.2d 111 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1980)
McFarland v. Beardsly
252 S.E.2d 72 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1979)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
246 S.E.2d 423, 146 Ga. App. 403, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 2377, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ambrose-v-e-f-hutton-co-gactapp-1978.