Fisher v. Pirtle

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Fisher v. Pirtle

167 S.E.2d 613, 119 Ga. App. 556, 1969 Ga. App. LEXIS 1160

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 17, 1969

Docket44358

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 167 S.E.2d 613 (Fisher v. Pirtle) 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

Fisher v. Pirtle, 167 S.E.2d 613, 119 Ga. App. 556, 1969 Ga. App. LEXIS 1160 (Ga. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Bell, Presiding Judge.

At the hearing on the motion for summary judgment it was shown by the admission of third parties defendant and by application against the plaintiff of the holding in Moore v. Hanson, 224 Ga. 482 (1) (162 SE2d 429) that the plaintiff in this personal injury suit had previ *557 ously executed a covenant not to sue which fell within the provisions of Code Ann. § 56-408.1 (Ga. L. 1963, p. 643). See Aetna Casualty Co. v. Brooks, 106 Ga. App. 427 (127 SE2d 183), reversed by 218 Ga. 593 (129 SE2d 798), but revived by Ga. L. 1963, p. 643. Accordingly, this case is controlled adversely to the plaintiff appellant by Jackson v. Kight, 117 Ga. App. 385 (160 SE2d 668) and Fillingame v. Cook, 119 Ga. App. 140 (166 SE2d 440).

Argued April 9, 1969 Decided April 17, 1969. Walter V. Beasley, for appellant. Eugene G. Partain, Richard H. Vincent, Powell, Goldstein, Frazer & Murphy, Jack M. McLaughlin, for appellees.

Judgment affirmed.

Eberhardt and Deen, JJ., concur.

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

Bell, Presiding Judge.

At the hearing on the motion for summary judgment it was shown by the admission of third parties defendant and by application against the plaintiff of the holding in Moore v. Hanson, 224 Ga. 482 (1) (162 SE2d 429) that the plaintiff in this personal injury suit had previ *557 ously executed a covenant not to sue which fell within the provisions of Code Ann. § 56-408.1 (Ga. L. 1963, p. 643). See Aetna Casualty Co. v. Brooks, 106 Ga. App. 427 (127 SE2d 183), reversed by 218 Ga. 593 (129 SE2d 798), but revived by Ga. L. 1963, p. 643. Accordingly, this case is controlled adversely to the plaintiff appellant by Jackson v. Kight, 117 Ga. App. 385 (160 SE2d 668) and Fillingame v. Cook, 119 Ga. App. 140 (166 SE2d 440).

Argued April 9, 1969 Decided April 17, 1969. Walter V. Beasley, for appellant. Eugene G. Partain, Richard H. Vincent, Powell, Goldstein, Frazer & Murphy, Jack M. McLaughlin, for appellees.

Judgment affirmed.

Eberhardt and Deen, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

167 S.E.2d 613, 119 Ga. App. 556, 1969 Ga. App. LEXIS 1160, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fisher-v-pirtle-gactapp-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack