Dunn v. Campbell

134 S.E.2d 20, 219 Ga. 412, 1963 Ga. LEXIS 468
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedNovember 7, 1963
Docket22206
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 134 S.E.2d 20 (Dunn v. Campbell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dunn v. Campbell, 134 S.E.2d 20, 219 Ga. 412, 1963 Ga. LEXIS 468 (Ga. 1963).

Opinions

Per Curiam.

The second ground of general demurrer is that the petition does- not set forth a valid cause of action for declaratory judgment. This court has held in full-bench cases: “While, under Ga. L. 1959, p. 236, amending the Declaratory Judgments Act (Ga. L. 1945, p. 137; Code Ann. § 110-1101 et seq.), by adding thereto Section 1(c), one is not precluded from obtaining relief by declaratory judgment merely because the complaining party has other adequate legal or equitable remedy or remedies, yet ‘The object of the declaratory judgment is to permit determination of a controversy before obligations are repudiated or [415]*415rights are violated.’ Rowan v. Herring, 214 Ga. 370, 374 (105 SE2d 29), and cases there cited. And where, as here, the petition shows that the rights of the parties have already accrued and no facts or circumstances are alleged which show that an adjudication of the plaintiffs’ rights is necessary in order to relieve the plaintiffs from the risk of taking any future undirected action incident to their rights, which action without direction would jeopardize their interests, the petition fails to state a cause of action for declaratory judgment.” Pinkard v. Mendel, 216 Ga. 487, 490 (2) (117 SE2d 336); State Hwy. Dept. v. Ga. Southern &c. R. Co., 216 Ga. 547 (2) (117 SE2d 897). The present suit is a simple statutory action for the collection of an assessment instituted under and as provided by the Georgia Agricultural Commodities Promotion Act (Ga. L. 1961, pp. 301, 348, Section 20; Code Ann. § 5-2920). In the opinion of the court it falls squarely within the rule above stated and hence does not set forth cause for a declaratory judgment.

The trial judge erred in overruling the defendant’s demurrer to the petition.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur, except Quillian, J., who dissents.

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

Related

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Hillhouse
206 S.E.2d 627 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1974)
LaSalle National Insurance v. Popham
188 S.E.2d 870 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1972)
Ditmyer v. American Liberty Insurance
160 S.E.2d 844 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1968)
Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co. v. Moody
156 S.E.2d 117 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1967)
American Mutual Insurance v. Aderholt
151 S.E.2d 833 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1966)
Walker v. Barrett
145 S.E.2d 627 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1965)
Dunn v. Campbell
134 S.E.2d 20 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1963)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
134 S.E.2d 20, 219 Ga. 412, 1963 Ga. LEXIS 468, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dunn-v-campbell-ga-1963.