Osley v. Abernathy
This text of 84 S.E.2d 113 (Osley v. Abernathy) 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.
Opinion
In an action for bail trover, where the petition alleges only the following description of the property: “9 Ladies Wool & Cashmere Coats, 1 Ladies Suit; 8 Mens Shirts, 1 Wool Sweater Set, 12 Ladies Skirts, 7 Boys Shirts, 7 Boys Overalls, 2 Childs Dresses, 3 Ladies Dresses, 2 Sport Coats, 4 Mens Trousers, 4 Ladies Wool & Cashmere Toppers, 2 Tech Type Sweaters, 2 Mens Overalls, 4 Sheets, 1 Chenille Bed Spread, 10 Pr. Mens Shoes, 5 Pr. Childs Shoes, 1 Bulova Mans Strap Watch, 3 Leather Mens Jackets, 1 Childs Snow Suit, 2 Pr. Mens Work Pants, 3 Boys Suits, 3 Leatherette Jackets, 4 Ladies Sweaters, 4 Cotton Slips, 3 Mrnd Best Coat Sweaters, 11 Boys Dungarees, 1 Pr. Boys Cordorory Pants, 1 Blanket, Total Value $575.00, Actual Wholesale Cost”; and there is no further description of the property—the petition fails to identify the property sufficiently even as to one item, and the court erred in overruling a motion to dismiss the petition in the nature of a general demurrer. See Seaboard Security Co. v. Goodson, 51 Ga. App. 512 (2) (180 S. E. 858), and Teal v. Equitable Loan Co., 43 Ga. App. 673 (2) (159 S. E. 904).
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
84 S.E.2d 113, 90 Ga. App. 783, 1954 Ga. App. LEXIS 812, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/osley-v-abernathy-gactapp-1954.