Byrom v. Gunn

Supreme Court of Georgia

Byrom v. Gunn

35 S.E. 649, 111 Ga. 805, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 725

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedApril 5, 1900

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 35 S.E. 649 (Byrom v. Gunn) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Byrom v. Gunn, 35 S.E. 649, 111 Ga. 805, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 725 (Ga. 1900).

Pincite

Opinion

Cobb, J.

1. The amendment to the plaintiff’s petition, filed after the judgment which this court rendered in this case at the March term, 1899 (Gunn v. Byrom, 107 Ga. 147), and before the judgment was made the judgment of the trial court, did not in any material or substantial particular change [806]*806the character of that petition. This being so, the question presented by the present writ of error is, so far as relates to the controversy between the plaintiff and the defendant who demurred to his petition, the same which this court has already passed upon and adjudicated.

Argued March 6, — Decided April 5, 1900.

Equitable petition. Before Judge Felton. Bibb superior court. November term, 3898.

Guerry & Hall, for plaintiff. Hardeman & Moore and Dessau, Harris & Birch, for defendant.

2. When a petition is filed against two defendants, a separate demurrer by one of them in his own name and behalf only affords no cause for dismissing the petition as to the defendant who does not demur.

Judgment affirmed, with direction.

All the Justices concurring.

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

Cobb, J.

1. The amendment to the plaintiff’s petition, filed after the judgment which this court rendered in this case at the March term, 1899 (Gunn v. Byrom, 107 Ga. 147), and before the judgment was made the judgment of the trial court, did not in any material or substantial particular change [806]*806the character of that petition. This being so, the question presented by the present writ of error is, so far as relates to the controversy between the plaintiff and the defendant who demurred to his petition, the same which this court has already passed upon and adjudicated.

Argued March 6, — Decided April 5, 1900.

Equitable petition. Before Judge Felton. Bibb superior court. November term, 3898.

Guerry & Hall, for plaintiff. Hardeman & Moore and Dessau, Harris & Birch, for defendant.

2. When a petition is filed against two defendants, a separate demurrer by one of them in his own name and behalf only affords no cause for dismissing the petition as to the defendant who does not demur.

Judgment affirmed, with direction.

All the Justices concurring.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

35 S.E. 649, 111 Ga. 805, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 725, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/byrom-v-gunn-ga-1900.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack