Ellison v. White

182 S.E. 600, 181 Ga. 418, 1935 Ga. LEXIS 106
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Ellison v. White. Read the opinion of the Court — 178 Ga. 680
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided November 14, 1935·No. No. 10676·Published

Opinions

Russell, Chief Justice.

1. In view of the allegations in the answer as amended, as to the circumstances under which the transfer was signed, and that the contract qf assignment was ambiguous and was not intended by the parties to bind the defendant to refrain from engaging in the business of photography in Hall County for the period named in the original contract, the court erred in sustaining the demurrers to the paragraphs of the answer relating to the meaning of the transfer contract.

2. The court erred also in sustaining the demurrers to the paragraphs of the answer alleging want of consideration for the transfer.

3. The errors specified above rendered nugatory the subsequent proceedings in the case. Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Ellison v. White, 182 S.E. 600, 181 Ga. 418, 1935 Ga. LEXIS 106 (Ga. 1935).

182 S.E. 600 (Ellison v. White) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ellison v. White
173 S.E. 713 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1934)