Forbes v. Bass

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Forbes v. Bass

115 S.E. 773, 29 Ga. App. 405, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 35

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 11, 1923

Docket13955

StatusPublished

This text of 115 S.E. 773 (Forbes v. Bass) 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

Forbes v. Bass, 115 S.E. 773, 29 Ga. App. 405, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 35 (Ga. Ct. App. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

The court did not err in disallowing the proffered amendment to the defendant’s plea, nor in striking, the plea, nor in rendering judgment in favor of the plaintiff. The defendant set up no legal meritorious defense to the suit.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur. J. A. Darsey, for plaintiff in error,

cited: Thorpe v. Croto, 79 Vt. 390 (65 Atl. 562, 10 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1166); 9 Ga. App. 39; Id. 176 (8); 24 Ga. 478; 60 Ga. 460; 15 Ga. 321; 61 Ga. 472; 5 Ga. App. 548-9; 13 C. J. 342-4, par. 193-4; Park’s Code, §§ 4316, 3433; 120 Ga. 1003; 10 Ga. App. 356; Park's Code, §§ 4227, 4322; 128 Ga. 695.

Cleveland & Goodrich, contra,

cited: Dissenting opinion in Thorpe v. Croto, supra; 12 Ga. App. 735; 8 C. J. 434; 57 Ga. 433, 437; 33 Ga. 173; 5 Ga. App. 161; Il. 266; 139 Ga. 743; Civil Code (1910), § 4322.

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