Norbo Trading Corp. v. Wohlmuth

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Norbo Trading Corp. v. Wohlmuth

160 S.E.2d 679, 117 Ga. App. 412, 1968 Ga. App. LEXIS 1107

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMarch 15, 1968

Docket43464

StatusPublished

This text of 160 S.E.2d 679 (Norbo Trading Corp. v. Wohlmuth) 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

Norbo Trading Corp. v. Wohlmuth, 160 S.E.2d 679, 117 Ga. App. 412, 1968 Ga. App. LEXIS 1107 (Ga. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Hall, Judge.

The defendant in this case appeals from a judgment sustaining plaintiff’s general demurrer and dismissing his- counterclaim.

In Norbo Trading Corp. v. Resolute Ins. Co., 115 Ga. App. 490 (154 SE2d 704), this court held that “the allegations of the [413]*413wrongful and illegal acts of each and all of the defendants . . . as well as the allegations of conspiracy between the defendants” stated a cause of action. The defendants in that case were Resolute Insurance Company, Joseph B. Bergen, Charles Liek, and Southeastern Ship Salvage Corporation. It was alleged that Jerome Wohlmuth and Joseph Bergen were agents of Resolute through which that defendant committed alleged torts to Norbo’s property and destroyed its business. The present action is by Norbo Trading Corporation (hereinafter called Norbo) against Jerome Wohlmuth. (It was filed as a counterclaim to an action brought by Wohlmuth against Norbo, which has now been dismissed.) We have compared the petition against Resolute et al. with the action against Wohlmuth paragraph by paragraph and find the alleged facts and wrongful acts attributed to Wohlmuth and Bergen in the action against Wohlmuth identical in substance with those in the action against Resolute. The allegations showing participation by Resolute’s co-defendants other than Bergen are omitted in the action against Wohlmuth. And in the action against Wohlmuth, as in the action against Resolute, it is alleged that Wohlmuth and Bergen in their wrongful acts were agents of and acting in behalf of Resolute, and that they took over Norbo’s business and wilfully and wrongfully put Norbo out of business and caused it great loss and damage. In the petition considered by this court in Norbo Trading Corp. v. Resolute Ins. Co., supra, the principal, Resolute, was sued on the theory of respondeat superior for alleged torts of Wohlmuth and others. The counterclaim considered in this appeal differs in that Wohlmuth is sued individually for the same torts which he allegedly committed while acting as Resolute’s agent and with Bergen.

Argued February 6, 1968 Decided March 15, 1968. John R. Calhoun, for appellant. Joseph B. Bergen, for appellee.

Since substantially the same allegations against the principal were held sufficient to withstand the general demurrer, they are sufficient against the agent.

The trial court erred in sustaining the general demurrer and dismissing the counterclaim.

Judgment reversed.

Bell, P. J., and Quillian, J., concur.

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

Hall, Judge.

The defendant in this case appeals from a judgment sustaining plaintiff’s general demurrer and dismissing his- counterclaim.

In Norbo Trading Corp. v. Resolute Ins. Co., 115 Ga. App. 490 (154 SE2d 704), this court held that “the allegations of the [413]*413wrongful and illegal acts of each and all of the defendants . . . as well as the allegations of conspiracy between the defendants” stated a cause of action. The defendants in that case were Resolute Insurance Company, Joseph B. Bergen, Charles Liek, and Southeastern Ship Salvage Corporation. It was alleged that Jerome Wohlmuth and Joseph Bergen were agents of Resolute through which that defendant committed alleged torts to Norbo’s property and destroyed its business. The present action is by Norbo Trading Corporation (hereinafter called Norbo) against Jerome Wohlmuth. (It was filed as a counterclaim to an action brought by Wohlmuth against Norbo, which has now been dismissed.) We have compared the petition against Resolute et al. with the action against Wohlmuth paragraph by paragraph and find the alleged facts and wrongful acts attributed to Wohlmuth and Bergen in the action against Wohlmuth identical in substance with those in the action against Resolute. The allegations showing participation by Resolute’s co-defendants other than Bergen are omitted in the action against Wohlmuth. And in the action against Wohlmuth, as in the action against Resolute, it is alleged that Wohlmuth and Bergen in their wrongful acts were agents of and acting in behalf of Resolute, and that they took over Norbo’s business and wilfully and wrongfully put Norbo out of business and caused it great loss and damage. In the petition considered by this court in Norbo Trading Corp. v. Resolute Ins. Co., supra, the principal, Resolute, was sued on the theory of respondeat superior for alleged torts of Wohlmuth and others. The counterclaim considered in this appeal differs in that Wohlmuth is sued individually for the same torts which he allegedly committed while acting as Resolute’s agent and with Bergen.

Argued February 6, 1968 Decided March 15, 1968. John R. Calhoun, for appellant. Joseph B. Bergen, for appellee.

Since substantially the same allegations against the principal were held sufficient to withstand the general demurrer, they are sufficient against the agent.

The trial court erred in sustaining the general demurrer and dismissing the counterclaim.

Judgment reversed.

Bell, P. J., and Quillian, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

160 S.E.2d 679, 117 Ga. App. 412, 1968 Ga. App. LEXIS 1107, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/norbo-trading-corp-v-wohlmuth-gactapp-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack