Carey & Hill v. Cranston & Stovall

Supreme Court of Georgia

Carey & Hill v. Cranston & Stovall

99 Ga. 77

Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided April 27, 1896·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Atkinson, J.

Where a partnership brings an action in its firm name, stating in its declaration the names of the persons constituting the firm, a misnomer in the Christian name of either of the persons named as copartners may he corrected instanter, on motion, by amendment. Code, §3483; Johnson v. Central Railroad, 74 Ga. 397. Judgment affirmed,.

Hunt <& Merritt, for plaintiffs in error. R. H. Lewis, contra.

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

Atkinson, J.

Where a partnership brings an action in its firm name, stating in its declaration the names of the persons constituting the firm, a misnomer in the Christian name of either of the persons named as copartners may he corrected instanter, on motion, by amendment. Code, §3483; Johnson v. Central Railroad, 74 Ga. 397. Judgment affirmed,.

Hunt <& Merritt, for plaintiffs in error. R. H. Lewis, contra.

Carey & Hill v. Cranston & Stovall, 99 Ga. 77 (Ga. 1896).

Pincite

99 Ga. 77 (Carey & Hill v. Cranston & Stovall) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related