McFarland v. Lumpkin

Court of Appeals of Georgia

McFarland v. Lumpkin

133 S.E.2d 117, 108 Ga. App. 370, 1963 Ga. App. LEXIS 646

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 24, 1963

Docket40304

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 133 S.E.2d 117 (McFarland v. Lumpkin) 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

McFarland v. Lumpkin, 133 S.E.2d 117, 108 Ga. App. 370, 1963 Ga. App. LEXIS 646 (Ga. Ct. App. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

Felton, Chief Judge.

Where a petition is brought in two counts, one for breach of contract and the other on quantum meruit, and a general demurrer is sustained to the former count, the “cause” is still pending in the court below and an exception to the sustaining of the demurrer to one of the counts, under the following decisions, and others, is premature. Johnson v. Henry & Co., 178 Ga. 542 (174 SE 140); Carhart v. Mackle, 22 Ga. App. 520 (96 SE 591); Southern Flour &c. Co. v. Levy Rice Milling Co., 22 Ga. App. 554 (96 SE 593); Railey v. United Life &c. Ins. Co., 25 Ga. App. 301 (103 SE 84); Stein v. Lazarus, 33 Ga. App. 791 (128 SE 696). Hill v. Lang, 211 Ga. 484 (86 SE2d 498) is distinguishable from the cases coming under the general rale as above stated for reasons given by the court in that case.

Writ of error dismissed.

Eberhardt and Bussell, JJ., concur.

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

Felton, Chief Judge.

Where a petition is brought in two counts, one for breach of contract and the other on quantum meruit, and a general demurrer is sustained to the former count, the “cause” is still pending in the court below and an exception to the sustaining of the demurrer to one of the counts, under the following decisions, and others, is premature. Johnson v. Henry & Co., 178 Ga. 542 (174 SE 140); Carhart v. Mackle, 22 Ga. App. 520 (96 SE 591); Southern Flour &c. Co. v. Levy Rice Milling Co., 22 Ga. App. 554 (96 SE 593); Railey v. United Life &c. Ins. Co., 25 Ga. App. 301 (103 SE 84); Stein v. Lazarus, 33 Ga. App. 791 (128 SE 696). Hill v. Lang, 211 Ga. 484 (86 SE2d 498) is distinguishable from the cases coming under the general rale as above stated for reasons given by the court in that case.

Writ of error dismissed.

Eberhardt and Bussell, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

133 S.E.2d 117, 108 Ga. App. 370, 1963 Ga. App. LEXIS 646, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcfarland-v-lumpkin-gactapp-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack