McConnell v. Smith

Court of Appeals of Georgia

McConnell v. Smith

90 S.E. 88, 18 Ga. App. 618, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 1145

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 21, 1916

Docket7538

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 90 S.E. 88 (McConnell v. Smith) 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

McConnell v. Smith, 90 S.E. 88, 18 Ga. App. 618, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 1145 (Ga. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

Hodges, J.

1. “The pleading act of 1893 provided that petitions should ‘set forth the cause of action in orderly and distinct paragraphs numbered consecutively.’ Civil Code, § 4961. The act does not prescribe any penalty for a failure to comply with its terms. A petition not subdivided into paragraphs at all would evidence such a disregard of the requirements of the law that the same should be dismissed on motion. A petition which makes a paragraph of' every sentence, without reference to substance, would also evidence such a disregard of the spirit of the law that it should be dismissed on motion, for the reason that such a paragraphing would not be orderly. The true course lies between these two extremes. It is impossible to satisfactorily define what would be an orderly paragraph, and this matter must be left largely to the discretion of the trial judge.” Atlanta &c. Ry. Co. v. Smith, 119 Ga. 667 (46 S. E. 853). The act of 1913 establishing the municipal court of the city of Macon (Acts of 1913, p. 252) provides that “the judge shall disregard any error or defect which does rfot affect the substantial rights of the parties.” The court did not err in refusing to sustain the special demurrer.

2. The evidence authorized the verdict. Judgment aflb-med.

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

Hodges, J.

1. “The pleading act of 1893 provided that petitions should ‘set forth the cause of action in orderly and distinct paragraphs numbered consecutively.’ Civil Code, § 4961. The act does not prescribe any penalty for a failure to comply with its terms. A petition not subdivided into paragraphs at all would evidence such a disregard of the requirements of the law that the same should be dismissed on motion. A petition which makes a paragraph of' every sentence, without reference to substance, would also evidence such a disregard of the spirit of the law that it should be dismissed on motion, for the reason that such a paragraphing would not be orderly. The true course lies between these two extremes. It is impossible to satisfactorily define what would be an orderly paragraph, and this matter must be left largely to the discretion of the trial judge.” Atlanta &c. Ry. Co. v. Smith, 119 Ga. 667 (46 S. E. 853). The act of 1913 establishing the municipal court of the city of Macon (Acts of 1913, p. 252) provides that “the judge shall disregard any error or defect which does rfot affect the substantial rights of the parties.” The court did not err in refusing to sustain the special demurrer.

2. The evidence authorized the verdict. Judgment aflb-med.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

90 S.E. 88, 18 Ga. App. 618, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 1145, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcconnell-v-smith-gactapp-1916.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack