Daylight Industries, Inc. v. Allen

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Daylight Industries, Inc. v. Allen

179 S.E.2d 542, 123 Ga. App. 69, 1970 Ga. App. LEXIS 725

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedDecember 3, 1970

Docket45733

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 179 S.E.2d 542 (Daylight Industries, Inc. v. Allen) 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

Daylight Industries, Inc. v. Allen, 179 S.E.2d 542, 123 Ga. App. 69, 1970 Ga. App. LEXIS 725 (Ga. Ct. App. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

Jordan, Presiding Judge.

Daylight Industries, Inc., d/b/a Daylight Grocery Company, sued W. R. Allen, Jr. and J. C. Adams as individuals for the unpaid balance due on an account. The defendants moved to dismiss the action, alleging as ground 3 that the "Obligation, if any, owed to the plaintiff is owed by Adams Wholesale Meats and Provisions, Inc., a Georgia Corporation . . . and not owed by defendants individually.” After hearing evidence on the motion the trial judge sustained this ground of the motion and dismissed the complaint. The plaintiff appeals from this order. Held:

The motion, as considered by the trial judge after hearing evidence, must be treated as a motion for summary judgment. CPA §12 (c); Code Ann. §81A-112 (c); Smith v. Smith, 119 Ga. App. 803, 805 (168 SE2d 878). The evidence discloses a genuine issue of fact as to whether the alleged indebtedness is that of the two individual defendants, or that of another, or more precisely, the corporation which the defendants own. This is a jury question, and the trial judge erred in disposing of the issue by action tantamount to the grant of a summary judgment.

Judgment reversed.

Eberhardt and Pannell, JJ., concur.

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

Jordan, Presiding Judge.

Daylight Industries, Inc., d/b/a Daylight Grocery Company, sued W. R. Allen, Jr. and J. C. Adams as individuals for the unpaid balance due on an account. The defendants moved to dismiss the action, alleging as ground 3 that the "Obligation, if any, owed to the plaintiff is owed by Adams Wholesale Meats and Provisions, Inc., a Georgia Corporation . . . and not owed by defendants individually.” After hearing evidence on the motion the trial judge sustained this ground of the motion and dismissed the complaint. The plaintiff appeals from this order. Held:

The motion, as considered by the trial judge after hearing evidence, must be treated as a motion for summary judgment. CPA §12 (c); Code Ann. §81A-112 (c); Smith v. Smith, 119 Ga. App. 803, 805 (168 SE2d 878). The evidence discloses a genuine issue of fact as to whether the alleged indebtedness is that of the two individual defendants, or that of another, or more precisely, the corporation which the defendants own. This is a jury question, and the trial judge erred in disposing of the issue by action tantamount to the grant of a summary judgment.

Judgment reversed.

Eberhardt and Pannell, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

179 S.E.2d 542, 123 Ga. App. 69, 1970 Ga. App. LEXIS 725, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/daylight-industries-inc-v-allen-gactapp-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack