Jordan v. Barksdale

102 S.E. 823, 150 Ga. 131, 1920 Ga. LEXIS 80
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedApril 15, 1920
DocketNo. 1665
StatusPublished

This text of 102 S.E. 823 (Jordan v. Barksdale) 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
Jordan v. Barksdale, 102 S.E. 823, 150 Ga. 131, 1920 Ga. LEXIS 80 (Ga. 1920).

Opinion

Hill, J.

(After stating the foregoing facts.) The petition as amended contained allegations of fraud and duress. There was no special demurrer; and we think that as a whole, against a general demurrer, the petition set out a. cause of action, and that the court did not err in overruling the general demurrer. Civil Code (1910), §§ 4116, 4152, 4255, 4629; Whitt v. Blount, 124 Ga. 671 (2), 673 (53 S. E. 205); see also Dorsey v. Bryans, 143 Ga. 186 (84 S. E. 467, Ann. Cas. 1917A, 172).

Judgment affirmed,.

All the Justices concur, except Gilbert, J., absent for providential cause.

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

Related

Whitt v. Blount
53 S.E. 205 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1906)
Dorsey v. Bryans
84 S.E. 467 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1915)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
102 S.E. 823, 150 Ga. 131, 1920 Ga. LEXIS 80, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jordan-v-barksdale-ga-1920.