Proctor v. Lanier Collection Agency & Service, Inc.

248 S.E.2d 179, 147 Ga. App. 104, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 2794
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedSeptember 6, 1978
Docket56093
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 248 S.E.2d 179 (Proctor v. Lanier Collection Agency & Service, Inc.) 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
Proctor v. Lanier Collection Agency & Service, Inc., 248 S.E.2d 179, 147 Ga. App. 104, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 2794 (Ga. Ct. App. 1978).

Opinion

Webb, Judge.

Lanier sued appellants for an alleged indebtedness owed to its assignor Memorial Medical Center for medical services provided by the hospital in 1974 and 1976. The suit was tried on February 9,1978, and an employee of the Medical Center appearing on Lanier’s behalf introduced a hospital permit for the year 1977 and testified that it hung in the hospital admissions office. Appellants’ counsel objected to the relevance of the 1977 permit since the alleged debts were incurred in 1974 and 1976, or to oral testimony as to the hospital having permits for those years. The objections were overruled, judgment entered for Lanier, and this appeal ensued. We reverse.

*105 Submitted July 10, 1978 Decided September 6, 1978. Robert L. Goldstucker, Philip L. Merkel, for appellants. John T. Sparkman, Jr., for appellee.

In order to operate a hospital a permit from the State Department of Human Resources is required. Code Ann. § 88-1905. "This is clearly a regulatory measure as to health, not a fund-raising or tax measure or mere business permit. The courts of this state are committed to the doctrine that under these circumstances, in order to recover for services rendered, it must be shown the plaintiff was properly licensed, or as here, was the holder of the proper permit at the time the services were rendered . Management Search, Inc. v. Kinard, 231 Ga. 26, 27 (199 SE2d 899); Culverhouse v. Atlanta Assn. for Convalescent Aged Persons, Inc., 127 Ga. App. 574 (194 SE2d 299). Mere testimony that the plaintiff had a 'license’ was not such proof. The trial judge erred in entering judgment in favor of the plaintiff for this reason.” Reddix v. Chatham County Hospital Authority, 134 Ga. App. 860, 862 (3) (216 SE2d 680) (1975).

Judgment reversed.

Quillian, P. J., and McMurray, J., concur.

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

Related

Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith v. Zimmerman
285 S.E.2d 181 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1981)
Zimmerman v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.
283 S.E.2d 639 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1981)
Georgia Central Credit Union v. Weems
278 S.E.2d 88 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1981)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
248 S.E.2d 179, 147 Ga. App. 104, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 2794, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/proctor-v-lanier-collection-agency-service-inc-gactapp-1978.