Powell v. Wood
This text of 186 S.E. 675 (Powell v. Wood) 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
General demurrers to the petition, and special demurrers on the grounds of misjoinder of parties plaintiff and defendant, and causes of action, were sustained, and the petition was dismissed. A petition either in law or in equity must plainly, fully, and distinctly set forth a cause of action (Code of 1933, § 81-101) ; and it is equally important that the facts upon which the petitioner relies for recovery should clearly and distinctly show that he has a cause of action (Anderson v. Swift, 106 Ga. 748, 750, 32 S. E. 542), and the “facts must be so plainly and fully and distinctly set forth as to inform the opposite party of the grounds of the plaintiff’s action, to enable the jury to find an intelligible and complete verdict, and to enable the court to declare distinctly the law of the ease.” Murphy v. Lawrence, 2 Ga. 257, 258. The allegations of the petition are so confused, uncertain, vague, indefinite, and contradictory that this court, under the above rules, is unable to say that the court erred in sustaining the demurrers. Howell v. Rome Grocery Co., 102 Ga. 174 (29 S. E. 178).
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
186 S.E. 675, 182 Ga. 630, 1936 Ga. LEXIS 519, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/powell-v-wood-ga-1936.