Nevels v. Detroiter Mobile Homes

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Nevels v. Detroiter Mobile Homes

183 S.E.2d 77, 124 Ga. App. 112, 1971 Ga. App. LEXIS 832

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJune 22, 1971

Docket46035

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 183 S.E.2d 77 (Nevels v. Detroiter Mobile Homes) 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

Nevels v. Detroiter Mobile Homes, 183 S.E.2d 77, 124 Ga. App. 112, 1971 Ga. App. LEXIS 832 (Ga. Ct. App. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

Bell, Chief Judge.

The appellant as administrator filed suit on August 7, 1970, for damages arising out of an alleged malicious arrest and prosecution of the intestate. The warrant was dismissed on November 3, 1967. The administrator was appointed on March 4, 1968. The trial judge granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the case was barred by the statute of limitation. Appellant contends that the case was saved by the renewal statute as a prior suit had been brought in federal district court and there dismissed. Held:

1. The cause alleged in the complaint is of the type that is subject to the two-year statute of limitation. Code Ann. § 3-1004. McCullough v. Atlantic Refining Co., 50 Ga. App. 237 (1) (177 SE 601).

2. Even if a suit for the same cause had previously been filed in a federal district court and there dismissed, the statute of limitation is not tolled by the Georgia renewal statute (Code Ann. § 3-808) as the latter is not applicable to suits commenced in federal courts. Anderson v. Southern Bell Tel. &c. Co., 108 Ga. App. 314 (132 SE2d 820). See Lillibridge v. Riley, 316 F2d 232.

Judgment affirmed.

Pannell and Deen, JJ., concur.

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

Bell, Chief Judge.

The appellant as administrator filed suit on August 7, 1970, for damages arising out of an alleged malicious arrest and prosecution of the intestate. The warrant was dismissed on November 3, 1967. The administrator was appointed on March 4, 1968. The trial judge granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the case was barred by the statute of limitation. Appellant contends that the case was saved by the renewal statute as a prior suit had been brought in federal district court and there dismissed. Held:

1. The cause alleged in the complaint is of the type that is subject to the two-year statute of limitation. Code Ann. § 3-1004. McCullough v. Atlantic Refining Co., 50 Ga. App. 237 (1) (177 SE 601).

2. Even if a suit for the same cause had previously been filed in a federal district court and there dismissed, the statute of limitation is not tolled by the Georgia renewal statute (Code Ann. § 3-808) as the latter is not applicable to suits commenced in federal courts. Anderson v. Southern Bell Tel. &c. Co., 108 Ga. App. 314 (132 SE2d 820). See Lillibridge v. Riley, 316 F2d 232.

Judgment affirmed.

Pannell and Deen, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

183 S.E.2d 77, 124 Ga. App. 112, 1971 Ga. App. LEXIS 832, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nevels-v-detroiter-mobile-homes-gactapp-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack