Gowder v. Loggins

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Gowder v. Loggins

9 S.E.2d 200, 62 Ga. App. 648, 1940 Ga. App. LEXIS 390

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 31, 1940

Docket28375.

StatusPublished

This text of 9 S.E.2d 200 (Gowder v. Loggins) 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

Gowder v. Loggins, 9 S.E.2d 200, 62 Ga. App. 648, 1940 Ga. App. LEXIS 390 (Ga. Ct. App. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

Felton, J.

1. In a suit in a justice’s court on a summons, to whicii the account sued on is attached, as follows: “In re: Digging Tunnel Merk Mica M'ine. Balance due to date $54.90” it was not necessary that the copy of the account show whether it was based on an express written or parol contract or on an implied contract to pay for extra labor and materials not provided for in an express contract. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Drake, 21 Ga. App. 81 (94 S. E. 65); Wright v. Pearson, 48 Ga. App. 207 (172 S. E. 590).

2. A demurrer to a suit on open account on the ground that no itemized statement is attached is a special demurrer, and can not be filed or entertained after the first term.

3. The evidence authorized the verdict. The court did not err in overruling the certiorari.

Judgment affirmed.

Stephens, P. J., and Sutton, J., concur. *649 H. T. Oliver, for plaintiffs in error. Charles J. Thurmond, contra.

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

Felton, J.

1. In a suit in a justice’s court on a summons, to whicii the account sued on is attached, as follows: “In re: Digging Tunnel Merk Mica M'ine. Balance due to date $54.90” it was not necessary that the copy of the account show whether it was based on an express written or parol contract or on an implied contract to pay for extra labor and materials not provided for in an express contract. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Drake, 21 Ga. App. 81 (94 S. E. 65); Wright v. Pearson, 48 Ga. App. 207 (172 S. E. 590).

2. A demurrer to a suit on open account on the ground that no itemized statement is attached is a special demurrer, and can not be filed or entertained after the first term.

3. The evidence authorized the verdict. The court did not err in overruling the certiorari.

Judgment affirmed.

Stephens, P. J., and Sutton, J., concur. *649 H. T. Oliver, for plaintiffs in error. Charles J. Thurmond, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

9 S.E.2d 200, 62 Ga. App. 648, 1940 Ga. App. LEXIS 390, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gowder-v-loggins-gactapp-1940.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack