Jones v. Young

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Jones v. Young

220 S.E.2d 24, 136 Ga. App. 21, 1975 Ga. App. LEXIS 1231

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 19, 1975

Docket50952

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 220 S.E.2d 24 (Jones v. Young) 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

Jones v. Young, 220 S.E.2d 24, 136 Ga. App. 21, 1975 Ga. App. LEXIS 1231 (Ga. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Webb, Judge.

Carl Jones brought suit against Bob Young Realty, Inc. and its president, Robert A. Young, alleging that in 1972 and 1973 he was employed by defendants as a real estate agent on a commission basis, and that "In the said capacity” he had earned commissions of $4,446. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of defendant Young, and plaintiff appeals under authority of Code Ann. §§ 6-701 (4), 81A-156 (h). Held:

We affirm. The issue is whether Jones was employed as a commission salesman by Young. In answers to interrogatories, both defendants stated that Jones never worked for either during 1972 or 1973. In answer to the interrogatory "By whom was plaintiff employed during 1971, 1972 and 1973?” Jones listed 8 employers, and neither defendant appears on that list. Thus the allegation in the complaint that he was employed by defendants as a commission salesman in 1972 and 1973 is conclusively pierced, and the trial court did not err in rendering judgment for Young.

Judgment affirmed.

Bell, C. J., and Marshall, J., concur.

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

Webb, Judge.

Carl Jones brought suit against Bob Young Realty, Inc. and its president, Robert A. Young, alleging that in 1972 and 1973 he was employed by defendants as a real estate agent on a commission basis, and that "In the said capacity” he had earned commissions of $4,446. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of defendant Young, and plaintiff appeals under authority of Code Ann. §§ 6-701 (4), 81A-156 (h). Held:

We affirm. The issue is whether Jones was employed as a commission salesman by Young. In answers to interrogatories, both defendants stated that Jones never worked for either during 1972 or 1973. In answer to the interrogatory "By whom was plaintiff employed during 1971, 1972 and 1973?” Jones listed 8 employers, and neither defendant appears on that list. Thus the allegation in the complaint that he was employed by defendants as a commission salesman in 1972 and 1973 is conclusively pierced, and the trial court did not err in rendering judgment for Young.

Judgment affirmed.

Bell, C. J., and Marshall, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

220 S.E.2d 24, 136 Ga. App. 21, 1975 Ga. App. LEXIS 1231, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jones-v-young-gactapp-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack