Rauschenberg v. Peeples
118 S.E. 409, 30 Ga. App. 384, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 486
Opinion
Applying the principles announced in the headnotes, there was no error in sustaining the demurrer to the part of the amendment set forth in the statement of the facts. It follows that none of the rulings or charges were erroneous for any of the reasons assigned. The general grounds of the motion are not referred to in the brief, and therefore are treated as abandoned.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Rauschenberg v. Peeples, 118 S.E. 409, 30 Ga. App. 384, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 486 (Ga. Ct. App. 1923).
118 S.E. 409 (Rauschenberg v. Peeples) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Security Trust Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Gill Savings Ass'n
398 S.E.2d 382 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1990)
Rich v. Rawleigh Co.
171 S.E. 228 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1933)
Missouri Paint & Varnish Co. v. Bainbridge Variety Works
158 S.E. 615 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1931)
Wayne Oil Tank & Pump Co. v. Claxton Oil Co.
124 S.E. 75 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1924)