Curtis v. Ashworth

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Curtis v. Ashworth

143 S.E. 463, 38 Ga. App. 220, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 143

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Curtis v. Ashworth. Read the opinion of the Court — 36 Ga. App. 783 →

Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided May 22, 1928·No. 17820·Published

Opinion

Jenkins, P. J.

The judgment of affirmance heretofore entered in this case (36 Ga. App. 783, 138 S. E. 286) having been reversed by the Supreme Court on certiorari (165 Ga. 782, 142 S. E. 111), and the former judgment of this court having been vacated and set aside, the judgment of the trial court is now reversed because it overruled the demurrer in which it was contended that there was a misjoinder of parties defendant. Direction is given that the plaintiff be permitted to amend his petition by striking O. W. Curtis as a defendant, leaving the case to proceed against the defendant Ella Curtis.

Judgment reversed, with direction.

Stephens and Bell, JJ., concur.

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

Jenkins, P. J.

The judgment of affirmance heretofore entered in this case (36 Ga. App. 783, 138 S. E. 286) having been reversed by the Supreme Court on certiorari (165 Ga. 782, 142 S. E. 111), and the former judgment of this court having been vacated and set aside, the judgment of the trial court is now reversed because it overruled the demurrer in which it was contended that there was a misjoinder of parties defendant. Direction is given that the plaintiff be permitted to amend his petition by striking O. W. Curtis as a defendant, leaving the case to proceed against the defendant Ella Curtis.

Judgment reversed, with direction.

Stephens and Bell, JJ., concur.

Curtis v. Ashworth, 143 S.E. 463, 38 Ga. App. 220, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 143 (Ga. Ct. App. 1928).

Pincite

143 S.E. 463 (Curtis v. Ashworth) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related