Ferris v. Union Savings Bank

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Ferris v. Union Savings Bank

165 S.E. 450, 45 Ga. App. 544, 1932 Ga. App. LEXIS 609

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 1, 1932

Docket22125

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 165 S.E. 450 (Ferris v. Union Savings Bank) 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

Ferris v. Union Savings Bank, 165 S.E. 450, 45 Ga. App. 544, 1932 Ga. App. LEXIS 609 (Ga. Ct. App. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

I-Iooper, J.

1. “It is not proper for a demurrer to allege facts which are not set forth in the petition which it seeks to attack; it thereby becomes speaking in character, and should be overruled.” Warren v. Bearden, 16 Ga. App. 145 (84 S. E. 597), and cit. In the instant case counsel for the plaintiff in error admits in his brief that the demurrer to the petition was “in the nature of a speaking demurrer.” It follows that the demurrer was properly overruled.

2. The State superintendent of banks may, “in the name of the bank,” institute an action upon any cause of action which is vested by law in such bank. Ga. L. 1922, p. 65; Michie’s Code, § 2366(52). The petition in this case, brought in the name of Union Savings Bank as party plaintiff, to recover upon a note payable to that bank was properly amended so as to proceed in the name of “The Union Savings Bank, a banking corporation of said State and county, by and through W. J. Davis as superintendent of banks for the State of Georgia in charge of the liquidation of said Union Savings Bank.” Such amendment did not make a new party plaintiff. Anderson v. Bennett, 160 Ga. 517 (128 S. E. 660). The trial judge therefore, did not err in allowing said amendment over objection of the defendant.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., amd Luke, J., concur. Thomas L. Hill, for plaintiff in error. Rodney 8. Cohen, contra.

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

I-Iooper, J.

1. “It is not proper for a demurrer to allege facts which are not set forth in the petition which it seeks to attack; it thereby becomes speaking in character, and should be overruled.” Warren v. Bearden, 16 Ga. App. 145 (84 S. E. 597), and cit. In the instant case counsel for the plaintiff in error admits in his brief that the demurrer to the petition was “in the nature of a speaking demurrer.” It follows that the demurrer was properly overruled.

2. The State superintendent of banks may, “in the name of the bank,” institute an action upon any cause of action which is vested by law in such bank. Ga. L. 1922, p. 65; Michie’s Code, § 2366(52). The petition in this case, brought in the name of Union Savings Bank as party plaintiff, to recover upon a note payable to that bank was properly amended so as to proceed in the name of “The Union Savings Bank, a banking corporation of said State and county, by and through W. J. Davis as superintendent of banks for the State of Georgia in charge of the liquidation of said Union Savings Bank.” Such amendment did not make a new party plaintiff. Anderson v. Bennett, 160 Ga. 517 (128 S. E. 660). The trial judge therefore, did not err in allowing said amendment over objection of the defendant.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., amd Luke, J., concur. Thomas L. Hill, for plaintiff in error. Rodney 8. Cohen, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

165 S.E. 450, 45 Ga. App. 544, 1932 Ga. App. LEXIS 609, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ferris-v-union-savings-bank-gactapp-1932.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack