Bryan v. Gravely

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Bryan v. Gravely

114 S.E.2d 442, 101 Ga. App. 546, 1960 Ga. App. LEXIS 929

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 20, 1960

Docket38022

StatusPublished

This text of 114 S.E.2d 442 (Bryan v. Gravely) 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

Bryan v. Gravely, 114 S.E.2d 442, 101 Ga. App. 546, 1960 Ga. App. LEXIS 929 (Ga. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

Bell, Judge.

Where a petition is amended by adding a new count, the question as to whether the new count may be added by amendment is properly raised by special demurrer. It is error where a trial judge determines this question by a ruling on a general demurrer. Milton v. Milton, 195 Ga. 130 (23 S. E. 2d 411).

Where a count added by amendment to a petition contains allegations that the plaintiff, at the request of the defendant, and for the defendant’s use and benefit, paid to persons named in an exhibit attached to the petition the sum of $2,160.91 for the repair of buildings, that the defendant promised to pay the sum so expended to the plaintiff on demand, and that the defendant had refused to pay, a cause of action based upon an alleged express oral contract was stated and the count was not subject to general demurrer. This is true even though the count added by amendment was subject to being stricken by special demurrer for the reason that it set forth a new and distinct cause of action. Neal & Son v. Stanley, 17 Ga. App. 502 (87 S. E. 718).

The order sustaining the general demurrer is hereby reversed.

Felton, C. J., and Nichols, J., concur.

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

Bell, Judge.

Where a petition is amended by adding a new count, the question as to whether the new count may be added by amendment is properly raised by special demurrer. It is error where a trial judge determines this question by a ruling on a general demurrer. Milton v. Milton, 195 Ga. 130 (23 S. E. 2d 411).

Where a count added by amendment to a petition contains allegations that the plaintiff, at the request of the defendant, and for the defendant’s use and benefit, paid to persons named in an exhibit attached to the petition the sum of $2,160.91 for the repair of buildings, that the defendant promised to pay the sum so expended to the plaintiff on demand, and that the defendant had refused to pay, a cause of action based upon an alleged express oral contract was stated and the count was not subject to general demurrer. This is true even though the count added by amendment was subject to being stricken by special demurrer for the reason that it set forth a new and distinct cause of action. Neal & Son v. Stanley, 17 Ga. App. 502 (87 S. E. 718).

The order sustaining the general demurrer is hereby reversed.

Felton, C. J., and Nichols, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

114 S.E.2d 442, 101 Ga. App. 546, 1960 Ga. App. LEXIS 929, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bryan-v-gravely-gactapp-1960.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack