Hefner v. Fulton Bag & Cotton Mills

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Hefner v. Fulton Bag & Cotton Mills

142 S.E. 303, 37 Ga. App. 801, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 627

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMarch 7, 1928

Docket18311

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 142 S.E. 303 (Hefner v. Fulton Bag & Cotton Mills) 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

Hefner v. Fulton Bag & Cotton Mills, 142 S.E. 303, 37 Ga. App. 801, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 627 (Ga. Ct. App. 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

1. Where upon consideration of a demurrer to a petition the court passes an order which recites that “the plaintiff is given ten days in which to amend [the petition], or the case will then stand dismissed,” and where, in conformity to the order, the plaintiff amends the petition, and where subsequently the court rules that the amendment fails to comply with the order of the court and passes an order dismissing the case, the correctness of the order requiring the amendment is not for the consideration of this court. This is true although it is recited in the bill of exceptions that to this order the plaintiff “then and there excepted, and now excepts and assigns the same as error as being contrary to law.” When the plaintiff saw fit to meet the ruling of the court by offering an amendment, she waived her right to except to the ruling, and an exception upon the ground that she was forced to amend will not be considered. Farrer v. Edwards, 144 Ga. 553 (87 S. E. 777).

2. The plaintiff’s amendment to her petition failed to comply with the order requiring the amendment, and the dismissal of the case was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

Luke, J., eoneurs. Bloodworth, J., absent on account of illness.

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

Broyles, C. J.

1. Where upon consideration of a demurrer to a petition the court passes an order which recites that “the plaintiff is given ten days in which to amend [the petition], or the case will then stand dismissed,” and where, in conformity to the order, the plaintiff amends the petition, and where subsequently the court rules that the amendment fails to comply with the order of the court and passes an order dismissing the case, the correctness of the order requiring the amendment is not for the consideration of this court. This is true although it is recited in the bill of exceptions that to this order the plaintiff “then and there excepted, and now excepts and assigns the same as error as being contrary to law.” When the plaintiff saw fit to meet the ruling of the court by offering an amendment, she waived her right to except to the ruling, and an exception upon the ground that she was forced to amend will not be considered. Farrer v. Edwards, 144 Ga. 553 (87 S. E. 777).

2. The plaintiff’s amendment to her petition failed to comply with the order requiring the amendment, and the dismissal of the case was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

Luke, J., eoneurs. Bloodworth, J., absent on account of illness.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

142 S.E. 303, 37 Ga. App. 801, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 627, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hefner-v-fulton-bag-cotton-mills-gactapp-1928.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack