Clarke v. Parks

Supreme Court of Georgia

Clarke v. Parks

23 S.E. 839, 97 Ga. 374

Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided December 2, 1895·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Simmons, C. J.

1. A demurrer to, or a motion to strike, a plea on the grounds that it was not in compliance with the pleading act of 1893, and was argumentative and full of surplusage, without specifying how the plea was defective in the respects indicated, was too vague and general, and was, therefore, properly overruled.

[375] December 2, 1895.

Complaint on account. Before Judge Westmoreland. City court of Atlanta. March, term, 1895.

T. J. Ripley, for plaintiff.

2. The verdict was warranted by the evidence, and there was no error in denying a new trial. Judgment affirmed.

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

Simmons, C. J.

1. A demurrer to, or a motion to strike, a plea on the grounds that it was not in compliance with the pleading act of 1893, and was argumentative and full of surplusage, without specifying how the plea was defective in the respects indicated, was too vague and general, and was, therefore, properly overruled.

[375] December 2, 1895.

Complaint on account. Before Judge Westmoreland. City court of Atlanta. March, term, 1895.

T. J. Ripley, for plaintiff.

2. The verdict was warranted by the evidence, and there was no error in denying a new trial. Judgment affirmed.

Clarke v. Parks, 23 S.E. 839, 97 Ga. 374 (Ga. 1895).

Pincite

23 S.E. 839 (Clarke v. Parks) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related