Bell v. Pate

110 S.E. 498, 28 Ga. App. 195, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 382
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided February 10, 1922·No. 12555·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Stephens, J.

1. This being a suit in trover, in the municipal court of the city of Macon, for an alleged conversion of an automobile to which the plaintiff claimed title under a retention-of-title contract of sale to a third person, from whom the defendant subsequently bought the automobile, and the evidence authorizing the inference that the defendant bought it with actual knowledge of the plaintiff’s title, as well as constructive knowledge from the contract having been recorded as required by law, the verdict for the plaintiff was authorized.

2. It was not error to allow the plaintiff to amend the petition and process by striking the name of Mrs. Minnie Bell Stevens as the defendant and substituting therefor the true name of the defendant, to wit, Miss Minnie Bell. Civil Code (1910), § 5686.

3. No other assignment of error is insisted upon in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error.

4. The judge of the superior court did not err in overruling the certiorari.

Judgment affirmed.

Jenkins, P. J., and Hill, J., concur.

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

Bell v. Pate, 110 S.E. 498, 28 Ga. App. 195, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 382 (Ga. Ct. App. 1922).

110 S.E. 498 (Bell v. Pate) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Moody Air Force Base Federal Credit Union v. Kinard
156 S.E.2d 526 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1967)
Black v. Jacobs
149 S.E.2d 190 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1966)
Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. Parker
139 S.E. 581 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1927)