Smallwood v. Hall County

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Smallwood v. Hall County

158 S.E.2d 443, 116 Ga. App. 720, 1967 Ga. App. LEXIS 937

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedNovember 21, 1967

Docket43173

StatusPublished

This text of 158 S.E.2d 443 (Smallwood v. Hall County) 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

Smallwood v. Hall County, 158 S.E.2d 443, 116 Ga. App. 720, 1967 Ga. App. LEXIS 937 (Ga. Ct. App. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

Felton, Chief Judge.

1. The petition seeking damages from Hall County arising out of the alleged negligent operation of the county’s truck by a named driver, does not disclose, either expressly or by necessary implication, the existence of the agency of the driver, nor the connection of his act with the employment; therefore, the court did not err in its judgment sustaining the general demurrer. Code § 105-108; Lewis v. Amorous, 3 Ga. App. 50 (1) (59 SE 338). Neither does the petition show affirmatively that the action is authorized under the Constitution or statutes of this State. Decatur County v. Townsend, 46 Ga. App. 103 (1) (166 SE 774). And see Almon v. Terrell County, 89 Ga. App. 403 (79 SE2d 430). [721]*721It is not necessary to pass upon the question whether other reasons appear why the court was correct in sustaining the demurrer.

Argued November 6, 1967 Decided November 21, 1967. Howard B. Oliver, Jr., for appellant. Whelchel, Dunlap & Gignilliat, Weymon Forrester, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

Hall and Eberhardt, JJ., concur.

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

Felton, Chief Judge.

1. The petition seeking damages from Hall County arising out of the alleged negligent operation of the county’s truck by a named driver, does not disclose, either expressly or by necessary implication, the existence of the agency of the driver, nor the connection of his act with the employment; therefore, the court did not err in its judgment sustaining the general demurrer. Code § 105-108; Lewis v. Amorous, 3 Ga. App. 50 (1) (59 SE 338). Neither does the petition show affirmatively that the action is authorized under the Constitution or statutes of this State. Decatur County v. Townsend, 46 Ga. App. 103 (1) (166 SE 774). And see Almon v. Terrell County, 89 Ga. App. 403 (79 SE2d 430). [721]*721It is not necessary to pass upon the question whether other reasons appear why the court was correct in sustaining the demurrer.

Argued November 6, 1967 Decided November 21, 1967. Howard B. Oliver, Jr., for appellant. Whelchel, Dunlap & Gignilliat, Weymon Forrester, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

Hall and Eberhardt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

158 S.E.2d 443, 116 Ga. App. 720, 1967 Ga. App. LEXIS 937, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smallwood-v-hall-county-gactapp-1967.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack