Davison-Paxon Co. v. Walker

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Davison-Paxon Co. v. Walker

171 S.E. 390, 47 Ga. App. 718, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 622

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedOctober 12, 1933

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 171 S.E. 390 (Davison-Paxon Co. v. Walker) 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

Davison-Paxon Co. v. Walker, 171 S.E. 390, 47 Ga. App. 718, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 622 (Ga. Ct. App. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

1. The court did not err in allowing the amendment to the second count of the petition (the demurrer to the original second count having been overruled, and that judgment having been reversed by this court), the amendment being allowed before the remittitur from this court was made the judgment of the trial court.

2. When this case was here before (45 Ga. App. 395, 165 S. E. 160), this court held that the second count of the petition failed to set out a cause of action for malicious abuse of legal process. That count as subsequently amended contained no material fact (material in such an action) that was not set forth in the original count. It follows that under the previous ruling of this court (which has become the law of this case) the court erred in overruling the general demurrer to the second count as amended.

Judgment reversed.

MacIntyre and Guerry, JJ., concur.

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

Broyles, C. J.

1. The court did not err in allowing the amendment to the second count of the petition (the demurrer to the original second count having been overruled, and that judgment having been reversed by this court), the amendment being allowed before the remittitur from this court was made the judgment of the trial court.

2. When this case was here before (45 Ga. App. 395, 165 S. E. 160), this court held that the second count of the petition failed to set out a cause of action for malicious abuse of legal process. That count as subsequently amended contained no material fact (material in such an action) that was not set forth in the original count. It follows that under the previous ruling of this court (which has become the law of this case) the court erred in overruling the general demurrer to the second count as amended.

Judgment reversed.

MacIntyre and Guerry, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

171 S.E. 390, 47 Ga. App. 718, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 622, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davison-paxon-co-v-walker-gactapp-1933.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack