Pruitt v. Pace

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Pruitt v. Pace

72 S.E. 1098, 10 Ga. App. 201, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 713

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedDecember 19, 1911

Docket3415

StatusPublished

This text of 72 S.E. 1098 (Pruitt v. Pace) 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

Pruitt v. Pace, 72 S.E. 1098, 10 Ga. App. 201, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 713 (Ga. Ct. App. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

Hill, C. J.

This was a foreclosure of a laborer’s lien claimed under section 2792 of the Civil Code of 1895, now section 3334 of the Civil Code of 1910; and, the evidence of the alleged “laborer” clearly showing that he was not a “laborer,” in the sense in which that word is used in the statute, there was no error in sustaining the certiorari and in entering final judgment against him. The case is fully controlled by the decision in Howell v. Atkinson, 3 Ga. App. 58 (59 S. E. 316). Judgment affirmed.

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

Hill, C. J.

This was a foreclosure of a laborer’s lien claimed under section 2792 of the Civil Code of 1895, now section 3334 of the Civil Code of 1910; and, the evidence of the alleged “laborer” clearly showing that he was not a “laborer,” in the sense in which that word is used in the statute, there was no error in sustaining the certiorari and in entering final judgment against him. The case is fully controlled by the decision in Howell v. Atkinson, 3 Ga. App. 58 (59 S. E. 316). Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

72 S.E. 1098, 10 Ga. App. 201, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 713, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pruitt-v-pace-gactapp-1911.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack