Moore v. First National Bank of Atlanta

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Moore v. First National Bank of Atlanta

233 S.E.2d 26, 141 Ga. App. 164, 1977 Ga. App. LEXIS 1811

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 31, 1977

Docket53326

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 233 S.E.2d 26 (Moore v. First National Bank of Atlanta) 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

Moore v. First National Bank of Atlanta, 233 S.E.2d 26, 141 Ga. App. 164, 1977 Ga. App. LEXIS 1811 (Ga. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Quillian, Presiding Judge.

The plaintiffs complaint sought recovery on the unpaid balance due on a sales contract for a used automobile. The defendant by answer denied the material allegations of the complaint and plead accord and satisfaction and that the plaintiff failed to mitigate damages. On demand by the defendant, the case was tried by a jury.

Defendant appeals from the judgment rendered on the jury verdict in favor of the plaintiff. Two grounds are contained in the enumeration of errors: (1) the court erred in not dismissing the plaintiffs original complaint; (2) the court erred in that it did not make a finding of fact and conclusion of law in the case. Held:

1. Insofar as the first ground raises a question as to the sufficiency of service of process, there was a waiver by *165 the failure to object in the lower court. CPA § 12 (b) and (h) (Code Ann. § 81A-112 (b) and (h); Ga. L. 1966, pp. 609, 622; 1967, pp. 226, 231; 1968, pp. 1104, 1106; 1972, pp. 689, 692, 693)); American Finance Co. v. First Nat. Bank, 135 Ga. App. 24 (217 SE2d 364); Pascoe Steel Corp. v. Turner County Bd. of Education, 139 Ga. App. 87, 89 (227 SE2d 887). See Echols v. Dyches, 140 Ga. App. 191 (230 SE2d 315). For pertinent cases prior to the Civil Practice Act, see Cherry v. McCutchen, 68 Ga. App. 682, 689 (1) (23 SE2d 587); Talbott & Sons v. Collier, 102 Ga. 550 (2) (28 SE 225); Cutliffe v. Pryse, 187 Ga. 51, 54 (200 SE2d 124); Chance v. Planters &c. Cooperative, 219 Ga. 1 (131 SE2d 541).

Argued January 12, 1977 Decided January 31, 1977. Kathleen Moore, pro se. Maley & Crowe, Ronald F. Johnson, for appellee.

2. Since the case was tried before a jury, findings of fact and conclusions of law under CPA § 52 (Code Ann. § 81A-152; Ga. L. 1969, pp. 645, 646; 1970, pp. 170, 171) were not required. Thomas v. Jackson, 238 Ga. 90 (1).

Judgment affirmed.

Stolz and Shulman, JJ., concur.

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

Quillian, Presiding Judge.

The plaintiffs complaint sought recovery on the unpaid balance due on a sales contract for a used automobile. The defendant by answer denied the material allegations of the complaint and plead accord and satisfaction and that the plaintiff failed to mitigate damages. On demand by the defendant, the case was tried by a jury.

Defendant appeals from the judgment rendered on the jury verdict in favor of the plaintiff. Two grounds are contained in the enumeration of errors: (1) the court erred in not dismissing the plaintiffs original complaint; (2) the court erred in that it did not make a finding of fact and conclusion of law in the case. Held:

1. Insofar as the first ground raises a question as to the sufficiency of service of process, there was a waiver by *165 the failure to object in the lower court. CPA § 12 (b) and (h) (Code Ann. § 81A-112 (b) and (h); Ga. L. 1966, pp. 609, 622; 1967, pp. 226, 231; 1968, pp. 1104, 1106; 1972, pp. 689, 692, 693)); American Finance Co. v. First Nat. Bank, 135 Ga. App. 24 (217 SE2d 364); Pascoe Steel Corp. v. Turner County Bd. of Education, 139 Ga. App. 87, 89 (227 SE2d 887). See Echols v. Dyches, 140 Ga. App. 191 (230 SE2d 315). For pertinent cases prior to the Civil Practice Act, see Cherry v. McCutchen, 68 Ga. App. 682, 689 (1) (23 SE2d 587); Talbott & Sons v. Collier, 102 Ga. 550 (2) (28 SE 225); Cutliffe v. Pryse, 187 Ga. 51, 54 (200 SE2d 124); Chance v. Planters &c. Cooperative, 219 Ga. 1 (131 SE2d 541).

Argued January 12, 1977 Decided January 31, 1977. Kathleen Moore, pro se. Maley & Crowe, Ronald F. Johnson, for appellee.

2. Since the case was tried before a jury, findings of fact and conclusions of law under CPA § 52 (Code Ann. § 81A-152; Ga. L. 1969, pp. 645, 646; 1970, pp. 170, 171) were not required. Thomas v. Jackson, 238 Ga. 90 (1).

Judgment affirmed.

Stolz and Shulman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

233 S.E.2d 26, 141 Ga. App. 164, 1977 Ga. App. LEXIS 1811, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moore-v-first-national-bank-of-atlanta-gactapp-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack