Kent v. BARRETT OIL COMPANY, INC.

125 S.E.2d 59, 217 Ga. 750, 1962 Ga. LEXIS 379
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedApril 5, 1962
Docket21577
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 125 S.E.2d 59 (Kent v. BARRETT OIL COMPANY, INC.) 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
Kent v. BARRETT OIL COMPANY, INC., 125 S.E.2d 59, 217 Ga. 750, 1962 Ga. LEXIS 379 (Ga. 1962).

Opinion

Almand, Justice.

The exception here is to an order sustaining demurrers to the amended petition, seeking legal and equitable relief, the effect of such orders being to. dismiss Standard Oil Company as a party defendant and to> dismiss the petition a,gainst Barrett Oil Company, Inc.

A. D. Kent filed suit against Barrett Oil Company, Inc., and Standard Oil Company of Kentucky, as joint defendants, seeking a temporary and permanent injunction against both defendants, removal of their property from the premises owned by the plaintiff, damages for trespass and unlawful possession, and a declaratory judgment.

*751 The petition as originally filed sought relief by way of a declaratory judgment to adjudicate the rights of the parties. A demurrer was filed which, among other things, raised the question as to whether the declaratory-judgment procedure was the proper one under the facts stated in the petition. In the plaintiff’s final amendment to avoid having his petition dismissed, the prayer for a declaratory judgment was stricken. The plaintiff by amending his petition to meet the ruling of the trial court is now estopped to question the correctness thereof. The question as to whether declaratory judgment is the proper procedure is, therefore, moot since such prayer was stricken from the petition. See Glover v. Savannah, Fla. & W. Ry. Co., 107 Ga. 34 (3) (32 SE 876); Rivers v. Key, 189 Ga. 832 (1) (7 SE2d 732).

The plaintiff in error’s brief was directed solely to the declaratory-judgment question and not to other questions presented by the rulings of the lower court. The other contentions not having been argued in this court either by brief or orally will be considered as abandoned. Wood v. Pool, 211 Ga. 789 (2) (89 SE2d 192).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Related

Edwards v. United Stone & Allied Products Workers
137 S.E.2d 632 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1964)
Balkcom v. Defore
135 S.E.2d 425 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1964)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
125 S.E.2d 59, 217 Ga. 750, 1962 Ga. LEXIS 379, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kent-v-barrett-oil-company-inc-ga-1962.