Home/Supreme Court of Georgia/Howington v. Juhan

Howington v. Juhan

130 S.E.2d 822, 218 Ga. 748, 1963 Ga. LEXIS 322
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedMarch 25, 1963
Docket21992
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 130 S.E.2d 822 (Howington v. Juhan) 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
Howington v. Juhan, 130 S.E.2d 822, 218 Ga. 748, 1963 Ga. LEXIS 322 (Ga. 1963).

Opinion

Duckworth, Chief Justice.

It has been repeatedly held that a petition for specific performance of a contract must allege the value of the property so as to enable the court to determine that the contract was fair, just and not against good conscience. Code § 37-805; Shropshire v. Rainey, 150 Ga. 566 (104 SE 414); Coleman v. Woodland Hills Co., 196 Ga. 626 (27 SE2d 226); Ogletree v. Ingram & LeGrand Lbr. Co., 207 Ga. 333 (61 SE2d 480); Harris v. Abney, 208 Ga. 518 (67 SE2d 724); Payne v. Jones, 211 Ga. 322, 327 (86 SE2d 3). The petition having failed to make such allegations, no cause of action for specific performance of the contract is alleged, and the lower court did not err in sustaining the general demurrer and dismissing the petition.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Related

Moody v. Mendenhall
234 S.E.2d 905 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1977)
Childs v. Lee
163 S.E.2d 726 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1968)
GEORGIA MONEY CORPORATION v. Monteleone Apartments, Inc.
156 S.E.2d 39 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1967)
Banks v. Harden
138 S.E.2d 320 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1964)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
130 S.E.2d 822, 218 Ga. 748, 1963 Ga. LEXIS 322, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/howington-v-juhan-ga-1963.