Puckett v. Nettles

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Puckett v. Nettles

205 S.E.2d 28, 131 Ga. App. 3, 1974 Ga. App. LEXIS 1303

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 4, 1974

Docket48715

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 205 S.E.2d 28 (Puckett v. Nettles) 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

Puckett v. Nettles, 205 S.E.2d 28, 131 Ga. App. 3, 1974 Ga. App. LEXIS 1303 (Ga. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

Pannell, Judge.

Where, as in the present case, a motion by defendant is made to dismiss an action brought on the grounds the statute of limitation has run on the cause of action asserted and the complaint itself alleges it is a renewal of a prior complaint, and upon hearing thereon evidence is introduced as to various other prior complaints, third-party complaints and cross actions, motions and orders thereon, and the disposition thereof, and the trial judge sustained defendant’s motion to dismiss and the complainant appeals to this court, we cannot, in the absence of the transcript of the evidence of the contents of the prior cases make a determination that the trial court erred or did not err. We, accordingly, must affirm. See Webb v. Jones, 221 Ga. 754 (146 SE2d 910); Ward v. National Dairy Products Corp., 224 Ga. 241 (161 SE2d 305).

Judgment affirmed.

Eberhardt, P. J, and Stolz, J, concur. *4 Joseph E. Cheeley, for appellant. Webb, Fowler & Tanner, W. Howard Fowler, for appellee.

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

Pannell, Judge.

Where, as in the present case, a motion by defendant is made to dismiss an action brought on the grounds the statute of limitation has run on the cause of action asserted and the complaint itself alleges it is a renewal of a prior complaint, and upon hearing thereon evidence is introduced as to various other prior complaints, third-party complaints and cross actions, motions and orders thereon, and the disposition thereof, and the trial judge sustained defendant’s motion to dismiss and the complainant appeals to this court, we cannot, in the absence of the transcript of the evidence of the contents of the prior cases make a determination that the trial court erred or did not err. We, accordingly, must affirm. See Webb v. Jones, 221 Ga. 754 (146 SE2d 910); Ward v. National Dairy Products Corp., 224 Ga. 241 (161 SE2d 305).

Judgment affirmed.

Eberhardt, P. J, and Stolz, J, concur. *4 Joseph E. Cheeley, for appellant. Webb, Fowler & Tanner, W. Howard Fowler, for appellee.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

205 S.E.2d 28, 131 Ga. App. 3, 1974 Ga. App. LEXIS 1303, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/puckett-v-nettles-gactapp-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack