Massachusetts Bonding & Insurance v. Lowenstein Investment Co.

109 S.E. 902, 152 Ga. 299, 1921 Ga. LEXIS 80
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided December 2, 1921·No. No. 2468·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Hill, J.

A contractor brought suit against the owner of a building for $250, the balance alleged to be due under the contract, in the municipal court of Atlanta. The owner filed in the superior court of Eulton County an equitable petition against the contractor and the surety upon its bond, in which the owner claimed damages in the sum of $5,000 for breach of the building contract, alleging that the municipal court of Atlanta was a court of limited jurisdiction and that its jurisdiction did not exceed $500 in amount. The owner prayed that the suit in the mu-ieipal court of Atlanta be enjoined, and that the plaintiff in that suit be required to set up its claim in the equity suit. Held:

1. The owner was entitled to maintain the suit in equity. Kirkpatrick v. Holland, 148 Ga. 708 (98 S. E. 265).

2. The petition as amended set forth a cause of action, and the court did not err in overruling the general demurrers thereto.

3. The special demurrers, in so far as meritorious, were met by the amendments to the petition.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Massachusetts Bonding & Insurance v. Lowenstein Investment Co., 109 S.E. 902, 152 Ga. 299, 1921 Ga. LEXIS 80 (Ga. 1921).

109 S.E. 902 (Massachusetts Bonding & Insurance v. Lowenstein Investment Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Robertson v. Barber
193 S.E.2d 9 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1972)
Centennial Flouring Mills Co. v. Schneider
132 P.2d 995 (Washington Supreme Court, 1943)
Otis v. Graham Paper Co.
4 S.E.2d 824 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1939)
Hanson v. Williams
154 S.E. 240 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1930)