Home/Supreme Court of Georgia/Jackson v. Security Insurance

Jackson v. Security Insurance

170 S.E. 787, 177 Ga. 631, 1933 Ga. LEXIS 377
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedSeptember 14, 1933
DocketNo. 9263
StatusPublished
Cited by23 cases

This text of 170 S.E. 787 (Jackson v. Security Insurance) 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
Jackson v. Security Insurance, 170 S.E. 787, 177 Ga. 631, 1933 Ga. LEXIS 377 (Ga. 1933).

Opinion

Hill, J.

1. “When the judgment of a trial court overruling a demurrer to a declaration is reversed by this court, the plaintiff has [632]*632the right to offer an amendment to the declaration at any time before the order is passed making the judgment of this court the judgment of the trial court.” Savannah, Florida & Western Ry. Co. v. Chaney, 102 Ga. 815, 817 (30 S. E. 347). See Augusta Ry. Co. v. Andrews, 92 Ga. 706 (19 S. E. 713); Cooper v. Portner Brewing Co., 113 Ga. 1, 3 (38 S. E. 347); Charleston & Western Carolina Ry. Co. v. Miller, 115 Ga. 92, 93 (41 S. E. 252); Berrien County Bank v. Alexander, 154 Ga. 775, 777 (115 S. E. 648), holding in effect that it was not too late before the remittitur was acted on and the judgment of the Supreme Court, reversing the judgment overruling a demurrer to the petition, was made the judgment of the lower court, to amend the petition to meet the grounds of demurrer.

2. The confusion growing out of cases cited by counsel pro and con arises from the fact that in certain of the cases the trial court did not lose jurisdiction of the case, and in others the court did lose jurisdiction; as, for instance, where the lower court overruled a demurrer to a petition; and in other cases where the trial court sustained the demurrer and dismissed the petition. See the discussion of this question in the opinion in Savannah, Florida & Western Ry. Co. v. Chaney, supra, where the distinction in the two classes of cases was pointed out.

3. Upon application of the foregoing principle, the question propounded by the Court of Appeals must be answered in the affirmative.

All the Justices concur.

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

Related

Giordano v. Stubbs
199 S.E.2d 322 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1973)
Welsch v. Wilson
131 S.E.2d 194 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1963)
Setzers Super Stores of Georgia, Inc. v. Higgins
121 S.E.2d 305 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1961)
Sammons v. Tingle
120 S.E.2d 124 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1961)
Wood v. Delta Insurance Co.
114 S.E.2d 883 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1960)
Kiser v. Kiser
108 S.E.2d 265 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1959)
Ware v. Martin
66 S.E.2d 737 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1951)
Southeastern Wholesale Furniture Co. v. Atlanta Metallic Casket Co.
66 S.E.2d 68 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1951)
Copeland v. Carpenter
59 S.E.2d 245 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1950)
Milton v. Milton
23 S.E.2d 411 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1942)
Owens v. Owens
8 S.E.2d 644 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1940)
Holton v. Lankford
6 S.E.2d 304 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1939)
Stanley v. Laurens County Board of Education
4 S.E.2d 164 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1939)
Byrd v. Prudential Insurance
195 S.E. 403 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1937)
Wilson v. Missouri State Life Insurance
190 S.E. 552 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1937)
Security Insurance v. Jackson
187 S.E. 234 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1936)
Kite v. Brooks
181 S.E. 107 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1935)
Dunn v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co.
175 S.E. 261 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1934)
Jackson v. Security Insurance
171 S.E. 301 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1933)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
170 S.E. 787, 177 Ga. 631, 1933 Ga. LEXIS 377, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jackson-v-security-insurance-ga-1933.