Payne v. City of Canon
This text of 89 S.E. 342 (Payne v. City of Canon) 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
Where the answer of a magistrate to a petition for certiorari is paragraphed, the paragraphs being numbered 1, 2, 3, and 4, a traverse by the plaintiff in certiorari, which says that “the allegations in the answer as follows, to wit: Paragraphs 2, 3, and 4 is not in fact true, of which he puts himself upon the country,while subject to grammatical criticism, sufficiently complies with the provision of section 5200 of the Civil Code of 1910 as to “specifying the portion of the [289]*289answer or return intended to be controverted.” The judge of the superior court erred in dismissing the traverse to the magistrate’s answer, and in thereafter overruling the cértiorari. Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
89 S.E. 342, 18 Ga. App. 288, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 302, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/payne-v-city-of-canon-gactapp-1916.