Newcomb Hotel Co. v. Corbett

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Newcomb Hotel Co. v. Corbett

103 S.E. 723, 25 Ga. App. 583, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 89

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJuly 29, 1920

Docket111350

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 103 S.E. 723 (Newcomb Hotel Co. v. Corbett) 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

Newcomb Hotel Co. v. Corbett, 103 S.E. 723, 25 Ga. App. 583, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 89 (Ga. Ct. App. 1920).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

On a former review of this case it was held: “ The amended petition, properly construed as a whole, was not subject to any ground, either general or special, of the demurrer interposed, and the court properly so ruled.” See Newcomb Hotel v. Corbett, 24 Ga. App. 533 (101 S. E. 713). At the trial term the plaintiff offered another amendment to the petition, which appears to have been allowed without objection, wherein the defendant’s acts of negligence, as deduced from the facts previously pleaded, were grouped together in the form of terse subparagraphs. The defendant thereupon filed a new demurrer, which was overruled,. and it 'again excepted. Held: (a) The court did not err in overruling the demurrer. (b) Whether the amendment was of sufficient materiality to open the petition to demurrer at the trial term is a question not raised, and therefore not decided; but see Park’s Ann. Code, § 5652, and annotations.

Judgment affirmed,

Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

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

Luke, J.

On a former review of this case it was held: “ The amended petition, properly construed as a whole, was not subject to any ground, either general or special, of the demurrer interposed, and the court properly so ruled.” See Newcomb Hotel v. Corbett, 24 Ga. App. 533 (101 S. E. 713). At the trial term the plaintiff offered another amendment to the petition, which appears to have been allowed without objection, wherein the defendant’s acts of negligence, as deduced from the facts previously pleaded, were grouped together in the form of terse subparagraphs. The defendant thereupon filed a new demurrer, which was overruled,. and it 'again excepted. Held: (a) The court did not err in overruling the demurrer. (b) Whether the amendment was of sufficient materiality to open the petition to demurrer at the trial term is a question not raised, and therefore not decided; but see Park’s Ann. Code, § 5652, and annotations.

Judgment affirmed,

Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

103 S.E. 723, 25 Ga. App. 583, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 89, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/newcomb-hotel-co-v-corbett-gactapp-1920.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack