Drake v. Lewis
85 S.E. 618, 16 Ga. App. 388, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 642
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Drake v. Lewis. Read the opinion of the Court — 13 Ga. App. 276 →
Opinion
1. The ruling in this ease is controlled by the decision in Drake v. Lewis, 13 Ga. App. 276, 280 (79 S. E. 167). The suit was upon a note, and the defense was predicated upon an alleged tort. See also Lee v. Harris, 88 Ga. 236 (14 S. E. 566); L. & N. Railroad Co. v. Spinks, 104 Ga. 696 (30 S. E. 968).
2. The court did not err in sustaining the motion to strike the answer of the defendant. Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Drake v. Lewis, 85 S.E. 618, 16 Ga. App. 388, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 642 (Ga. Ct. App. 1915).
85 S.E. 618 (Drake v. Lewis) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Lea v. Harris
14 S.E. 566 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1891)
Louisville & Nashville R. R. v. Spinks
30 S.E. 968 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1898)
Drake v. Lewis
79 S.E. 167 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1913)