Concept-National, Inc. v. DIMATTINA SUPPLY COMPANY, INC.

250 S.E.2d 552, 147 Ga. App. 865, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 2980
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedOctober 23, 1978
Docket56494
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 250 S.E.2d 552 (Concept-National, Inc. v. DIMATTINA SUPPLY COMPANY, INC.) 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
Concept-National, Inc. v. DIMATTINA SUPPLY COMPANY, INC., 250 S.E.2d 552, 147 Ga. App. 865, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 2980 (Ga. Ct. App. 1978).

Opinion

Smith, Judge.

Appellant contends the trial court erroneously granted summary judgment against it. We disagree and affirm.

Appellee moved for summary judgment on its complaint on open account. Attached to appellee’s complaint were its accounts indicating appellee sold and *866 delivered two anchors to appellant for $3,475. Appellant answered the complaint with a general denial of the alleged debt. Introduced in support of appellee’s motion was an affidavit by its president, who therein swore that appellant had ordered certain merchandise from appellee, that appellee had properly delivered the merchandise to appellant, that the price for the merchandise was $3,475, and that appellant had refused to comply with appellee’s demand for payment. Appellant’s president, by counter-affidavit, stated only that appellee’s accounts were incorrect and did not reflect "monies had and received by the Plaintiff from the Defendant.”

Argued September 13, 1978 Decided October 23, 1978 Rehearing denied November 2, 1978. Glenville Haldi, for appellant. Macey & Zusmann, Dennis M. Hall, Gary Backman, H. William Cohen, for appellee.

Appellee made a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment, and it then became incumbent upon appellant to come forward with "specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial.” (Emphasis supplied.) CPA § -56 (e). The vague, unsupported statement made by appellant’s president did not suffice to create a genuine issue, and the trial court properly granted summary judgment to appellee. Young v. Climatrol Southeast Distributing Corp., 141 Ga. App. 235 (233 SE2d 54) (1977); Hathcock v. Nat. Bank of Ga., 147 Ga. App. 134 (1978).

Judgment affirmed.

Deen, P. J., and Banke, J., concur.

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

Related

Sweet Water Tree Farm, Inc. v. J. Frank Schmidt & Son, Inc.
651 S.E.2d 787 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2007)
Scott v. Hamilton Dorsey Alston Co.
426 S.E.2d 55 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1992)
T. L. Rogers Oil Co. v. Sommers Co.
417 S.E.2d 44 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1992)
Paulk v. Carolina Eastern, Inc.
324 S.E.2d 527 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1984)
Carlos Jones Construction Co. v. Federal Deposit Insurance
315 S.E.2d 458 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1984)
Pollard v. FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF ALBANY
313 S.E.2d 785 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1984)
Gobbi v. Hurt
256 S.E.2d 664 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1979)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
250 S.E.2d 552, 147 Ga. App. 865, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 2980, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/concept-national-inc-v-dimattina-supply-company-inc-gactapp-1978.