Perkins Co. v. Shewmake & Murphey
This text of 46 S.E. 832 (Perkins Co. v. Shewmake & Murphey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1. A suit against the “ C. H. Perkins Company ” is not void, these words importing a corporation. Mattox v. State, 115 Ga. 212, 219; Adas Yeshurun Society v. Fish, 117 Ga. 345; Holcombe v. Cable Co., 119 Ga. 466.
2. A petition in such a suit may be amended by alleging that the company is a partnership composed of named individuals. Smith v. Columbia Jewelry Co., 114 Ga. 691.
3. A petition in a suit against the “ C. H. Perkins Company, a corporation,” is amendable by striking the words “ a corporation,” and making an allegation that the company is a partnership composed of named individuals. See Anglo-American Packing Co. v. Turner Casing Co. (Kan.), 8 Pac. 403; Prairie Lodge v. Smith, 58 Miss. 301.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
46 S.E. 832, 119 Ga. 617, 1904 Ga. LEXIS 306, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/perkins-co-v-shewmake-murphey-ga-1904.