Cook v. Daniel
This text of 95 S.E. 376 (Cook v. Daniel) 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.
Opinion
Under the liberal rule obtaining in this State, the court erred in declining to allow the proffered amendment which set up that the value of the mule damaged by the defendant’s automobile was partially and not wholly destroyed. With this amendment allowed, recovery for the value of its feed and the attention expended on the mule during the period of its convalescence from the injury was allowable in connection with a recovery for the partial depreciation of its market value, and the court therefore erred in dismissing the petition as corrected by the proposed amendment. City of Columbus v. Anglin, 120 Ga. 785, 793 (48 S. E. 318).
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
95 S.E. 376, 22 Ga. App. 48, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 133, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cook-v-daniel-gactapp-1918.