Malcolm v. Cotton

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Malcolm v. Cotton

197 S.E.2d 763, 128 Ga. App. 703, 1973 Ga. App. LEXIS 1585

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 3, 1973

Docket47978

StatusPublished

This text of 197 S.E.2d 763 (Malcolm v. Cotton) 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

Malcolm v. Cotton, 197 S.E.2d 763, 128 Ga. App. 703, 1973 Ga. App. LEXIS 1585 (Ga. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

Stolz, Judge.

In this companion case to Malcolm v. Cotton, 128 Ga. App. 699, the plaintiff husband sought damages for personal injuries and property damage to his automobile. The trial judge granted the defendant’s motion for a directed verdict on his defense of accord and satisfaction, then later granted the plaintiffs amended motion for new trial on the special ground that the circumstances of the case created a valid, equitable reason not to enforce the legal principle forbidding the splitting of a cause of action (claim). The defendant appeals from the order granting the motion for new trial. Held:

The order granting the motion for a new trial was not an appealable judgment under Code Ann. § 6-701 (Ga. L. 1965, p. 18; 1968, pp. 1072, 1073). No certificate for immediate review was entered under the provisions of Code Ann. § 6-701 (a, 2). Thus, the case is still pending in the court below and the appeal is premature. Eastland v. Candler, 225 Ga. 585 (170 SE2d 422) and cit.; Pilgreen’s Airport, Inc. v. Gold, 122 Ga. App. 194 (176 SE2d 480). Accordingly, on appellee’s motion to dismiss the appeal, it must be dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.

Eberhardt, P. J., and Pannell, J., concur.

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

Stolz, Judge.

In this companion case to Malcolm v. Cotton, 128 Ga. App. 699, the plaintiff husband sought damages for personal injuries and property damage to his automobile. The trial judge granted the defendant’s motion for a directed verdict on his defense of accord and satisfaction, then later granted the plaintiffs amended motion for new trial on the special ground that the circumstances of the case created a valid, equitable reason not to enforce the legal principle forbidding the splitting of a cause of action (claim). The defendant appeals from the order granting the motion for new trial. Held:

The order granting the motion for a new trial was not an appealable judgment under Code Ann. § 6-701 (Ga. L. 1965, p. 18; 1968, pp. 1072, 1073). No certificate for immediate review was entered under the provisions of Code Ann. § 6-701 (a, 2). Thus, the case is still pending in the court below and the appeal is premature. Eastland v. Candler, 225 Ga. 585 (170 SE2d 422) and cit.; Pilgreen’s Airport, Inc. v. Gold, 122 Ga. App. 194 (176 SE2d 480). Accordingly, on appellee’s motion to dismiss the appeal, it must be dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.

Eberhardt, P. J., and Pannell, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

197 S.E.2d 763, 128 Ga. App. 703, 1973 Ga. App. LEXIS 1585, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/malcolm-v-cotton-gactapp-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack