Robinson v. Central of Georgia Railway Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Robinson v. Central of Georgia Railway Co.

103 S.E. 737, 25 Ga. App. 507, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 40

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJuly 19, 1920

Docket9931

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 103 S.E. 737 (Robinson v. Central of Georgia Railway Co.) 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

Robinson v. Central of Georgia Railway Co., 103 S.E. 737, 25 Ga. App. 507, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 40 (Ga. Ct. App. 1920).

Pincite

Opinion

Jenkins, P. J.

The answers of the Supreme Court to the questions certified to it by this court in this case are to the effect that while the trial court did not err in dismissing the action on the grounds set out in the demurrer, yet, under the then state of facts as disclosed by the record, the .plaintiff should be allowed to amend his petition by substituting the name of the director-general of railroads as party defendant. 150 Ga. 41 (102 S. E. 532). The judgment of the court below is therefore affirmed, but with direction that unless there should be urged some other and valid objection not made by the record as now presented, the plaintiff be allowed to amend his petition by setting up the necessary facts in regard to, and naming the proper party defendant to, the said cause; and upon such amendment being-made and allowed, the case shall stand reinstated without prejudice. Judgment affirmed, with direction. Stephens and Smith, JJ., concur.

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

Jenkins, P. J.

The answers of the Supreme Court to the questions certified to it by this court in this case are to the effect that while the trial court did not err in dismissing the action on the grounds set out in the demurrer, yet, under the then state of facts as disclosed by the record, the .plaintiff should be allowed to amend his petition by substituting the name of the director-general of railroads as party defendant. 150 Ga. 41 (102 S. E. 532). The judgment of the court below is therefore affirmed, but with direction that unless there should be urged some other and valid objection not made by the record as now presented, the plaintiff be allowed to amend his petition by setting up the necessary facts in regard to, and naming the proper party defendant to, the said cause; and upon such amendment being-made and allowed, the case shall stand reinstated without prejudice. Judgment affirmed, with direction. Stephens and Smith, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

103 S.E. 737, 25 Ga. App. 507, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 40, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robinson-v-central-of-georgia-railway-co-gactapp-1920.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack