Hagins v. Blitch

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Hagins v. Blitch

65 S.E. 1082, 6 Ga. App. 839, 1909 Ga. App. LEXIS 495

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedNovember 9, 1909

Docket1760

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 65 S.E. 1082 (Hagins v. Blitch) 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

Hagins v. Blitch, 65 S.E. 1082, 6 Ga. App. 839, 1909 Ga. App. LEXIS 495 (Ga. Ct. App. 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

Hill, C. J.

1. Although a judgment be dormant, under the statute, and has, therefore, lost its lien, it is still a subsisting debt, and the judgment can be renewed, as matter of right, by scire facias or by suit. During the period of dormancy there is no presumption in favor of the ' defendant that the judgment has been paid, but such presumption exists only as to third persons. Civil Code, §5378; Battle v. Shivers, 39 Ga. 410; Chambliss v. Phelps, 39 Ga. 386 (2); Groves v. Williams, 68 Ga. 598 (3).

2. hi a suit to revive a judgment issued from a justice’s court, when the only plea is the general issue, the introduction in evidence of a transcript of the judgment, with entries showing summons and personal service, and the transcript of the fi. fa., with entries of partial payments, would be sufficient to entitle the plaintiff to a verdict reviving the judgment on the balance of the debt due thereon. Under the plea of the general issue, the correctness of the debt, satisfaction by payment, or satisfaction by lapse of time, is not in issue. Civil Code, §5053; Matthews v. Bates, 93 Ga. 318 (20 S. E. 320).

4. The court did not err in directing a verdict for the plaintiff.

Judgment affirmed.

Appeal, from Bulloch superior court — Judge Rawlings. October 28, 1908.

Submitted May 5, — Decided November 9, 1909. G-. 8. J ohnston, Sines & J ordan, for plaintiffs in error. Brannen <& Booth, contra.

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

Hill, C. J.

1. Although a judgment be dormant, under the statute, and has, therefore, lost its lien, it is still a subsisting debt, and the judgment can be renewed, as matter of right, by scire facias or by suit. During the period of dormancy there is no presumption in favor of the ' defendant that the judgment has been paid, but such presumption exists only as to third persons. Civil Code, §5378; Battle v. Shivers, 39 Ga. 410; Chambliss v. Phelps, 39 Ga. 386 (2); Groves v. Williams, 68 Ga. 598 (3).

2. hi a suit to revive a judgment issued from a justice’s court, when the only plea is the general issue, the introduction in evidence of a transcript of the judgment, with entries showing summons and personal service, and the transcript of the fi. fa., with entries of partial payments, would be sufficient to entitle the plaintiff to a verdict reviving the judgment on the balance of the debt due thereon. Under the plea of the general issue, the correctness of the debt, satisfaction by payment, or satisfaction by lapse of time, is not in issue. Civil Code, §5053; Matthews v. Bates, 93 Ga. 318 (20 S. E. 320).

4. The court did not err in directing a verdict for the plaintiff.

Judgment affirmed.

Appeal, from Bulloch superior court — Judge Rawlings. October 28, 1908.

Submitted May 5, — Decided November 9, 1909. G-. 8. J ohnston, Sines & J ordan, for plaintiffs in error. Brannen <& Booth, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

65 S.E. 1082, 6 Ga. App. 839, 1909 Ga. App. LEXIS 495, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hagins-v-blitch-gactapp-1909.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack