Eddleman v. Eddleman

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Eddleman v. Eddleman

190 S.E. 365, 55 Ga. App. 333, 1937 Ga. App. LEXIS 89

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Eddleman v. Eddleman. Read the opinion of the Court — 53 Ga. App. 368 →

Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided March 3, 1937·No. 25306·Published

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

“Wliile the statutes of this State embodied in the Code of 1933, §§ 2-2201, 53-501, 53-502', 53-503, do not purport to change the common law in respect to personal torts committed by one spouse against the other, they do change the common law in respect to property rights of the wife. With respect to such rights she is a feme sole, and may be sued by her husband in a bail-trover proceeding for recovery of his personal property converted by her.” The foregoing ruling constitutes the headnote of the Supreme Court in this case, which was carried to that court by writ of certiorari; and the judgment of this court affirming the grant of a nonsuit (53 Ga. App. 368, 186 S. E. 154) was reversed. See the able and exhaustive opinion of Justice Atkinson, 183 Ga. 766 (189 S. E. 833). The former judgment of this court is vacated, and the judgment awarding a nonsuit is

Reversed.

MacIntyre and Guerry, JJ., concur. John F. Echols, Oliver O. Hancock, for plaintiff. Robert Maginnis, for defendant.

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

Broyles, C. J.

“Wliile the statutes of this State embodied in the Code of 1933, §§ 2-2201, 53-501, 53-502', 53-503, do not purport to change the common law in respect to personal torts committed by one spouse against the other, they do change the common law in respect to property rights of the wife. With respect to such rights she is a feme sole, and may be sued by her husband in a bail-trover proceeding for recovery of his personal property converted by her.” The foregoing ruling constitutes the headnote of the Supreme Court in this case, which was carried to that court by writ of certiorari; and the judgment of this court affirming the grant of a nonsuit (53 Ga. App. 368, 186 S. E. 154) was reversed. See the able and exhaustive opinion of Justice Atkinson, 183 Ga. 766 (189 S. E. 833). The former judgment of this court is vacated, and the judgment awarding a nonsuit is

Reversed.

MacIntyre and Guerry, JJ., concur. John F. Echols, Oliver O. Hancock, for plaintiff. Robert Maginnis, for defendant.

Eddleman v. Eddleman, 190 S.E. 365, 55 Ga. App. 333, 1937 Ga. App. LEXIS 89 (Ga. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

190 S.E. 365 (Eddleman v. Eddleman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related