Glaser v. Meck

369 S.E.2d 912, 258 Ga. 468, 1988 Ga. LEXIS 313
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedJuly 14, 1988
Docket45685
StatusPublished
Cited by29 cases

This text of 369 S.E.2d 912 (Glaser v. Meck) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Glaser v. Meck, 369 S.E.2d 912, 258 Ga. 468, 1988 Ga. LEXIS 313 (Ga. 1988).

Opinion

*468 Smith, Justice.

1. Under OCGA § 9-11-12 (b), all defenses (except certain enumerated motions) “shall be asserted in the responsive pleadings.”

The defense raised by the appellee, Dr. Meek (a failure to attach to the complaint at the time of filing a certain affidavit) was not “asserted in the responsive pleading.” Nor was that defense one of the enumerated motions.

Indeed, it was not presented, by way of amendment to the answer, until three months after the filing of responsive pleadings, and until the statute of limitations on the underlying claim had run.

2. Had the failure to comply with new OCGA § 9-11-9.1 been brought to the appellant’s attention at the time the appellee filed responsive pleadings, she could have dismissed the pending action, and filed a renewed action before the statute of limitations would have run.

Because of the failure of the appellee to assert this defense at the time of the filing of responsive pleadings, as required by OCGA § 9-11-12 (b), that possibility is no longer available to the appellant.

3. OCGA § 9-11-8 (f) provides: “All pleadings shall be so construed as to do substantial justice.” We do not view it as substantial justice — in this case and under these circumstances — to award a final victory to the appellee upon a pleading default by the appellant, when that matter comes to the attention of the court only because the appellee has been permitted to remedy his own pleading default, and this after the running of the statute of limitations on the underlying claim.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur, except Marshall, C. J., and Bell, J., who dissent, and Hunt, J., not participating.

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

Related

Bonner v. Peterson
687 S.E.2d 676 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2009)
Chandler v. OPENSIDED MRI OF ATLANTA, LLC
682 S.E.2d 165 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2009)
Tucker v. Thomas C. Talley, M.D., P.C.
600 S.E.2d 778 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2004)
Glaser v. State
535 S.E.2d 231 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2000)
Glisson v. HOSPITAL AUTH. OF VALDOSTA
481 S.E.2d 612 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1997)
Moritz v. Orkin Exterminating Co.
450 S.E.2d 233 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1994)
Orkin Exterminating Co. v. Carder
450 S.E.2d 217 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1994)
Colston v. Fred's Pest Control, Inc.
436 S.E.2d 23 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1993)
Ramsey v. City of Forest Park
418 S.E.2d 432 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1992)
Thompson v. Long
411 S.E.2d 322 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1991)
Cheeley v. Henderson
405 S.E.2d 865 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1991)
Cheeley v. Henderson
398 S.E.2d 787 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1990)
Robinson v. Starr
398 S.E.2d 714 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1990)
Precision Planning, Inc. v. Wall
387 S.E.2d 610 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1989)
Housing Auth. of Savannah v. Greene
383 S.E.2d 867 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1989)
Reid v. Brazil
387 S.E.2d 1 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1989)
St. Joseph's Hospital, Inc. v. Nease
377 S.E.2d 847 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1989)
Frazier v. Merritt
380 S.E.2d 495 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1989)
Patterson v. Douglas Women's Center, PC
374 S.E.2d 737 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
369 S.E.2d 912, 258 Ga. 468, 1988 Ga. LEXIS 313, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/glaser-v-meck-ga-1988.