Southern Railway Co. v. Pitts

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Southern Railway Co. v. Pitts

93 S.E. 254, 20 Ga. App. 673, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 1028

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJuly 26, 1917

Docket8602

StatusPublished

This text of 93 S.E. 254 (Southern Railway Co. v. Pitts) 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

Southern Railway Co. v. Pitts, 93 S.E. 254, 20 Ga. App. 673, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 1028 (Ga. Ct. App. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

George, J.

The railway company, a non-resident corporation, was sued in a justice’s court. The verdict was for the plaintiff, and the defendant presented its petition for certiorari to the judge of the superior court. The certiorari was overruled, and exceptions were taken by the defendant. The sole contention made before this court is that the justice’s court had no jurisdiction of the suit, inasmuch as the suit sounded in tort, and the cause of action did not arise in the district. It is not contended, but on the contrary is tacitly admitted, that the court had jurisdiction of the suit if considered as an action on the contract. The plaintiff’s pleadings are not set out in the petition for certiorari, and the magistrate did not incorporate in his answer or send up the summons in the case. This court is unable to say that the action was in tort. The meagre references in the petition for certiorari make it uncertain whether the suit should be considered as sounding in tort or in contract; and after verdict this court will give the suit such construction as will support the verdict. The judge of the superior court did not err in overruling the certiorari. See Fine v. Southern Express Co., 10 Ga. Ajpp. 161 (73 S. E. 35), and cases cited.

Judgment affirmed.

Wade, O. J., and Luhe, J., concur.

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

George, J.

The railway company, a non-resident corporation, was sued in a justice’s court. The verdict was for the plaintiff, and the defendant presented its petition for certiorari to the judge of the superior court. The certiorari was overruled, and exceptions were taken by the defendant. The sole contention made before this court is that the justice’s court had no jurisdiction of the suit, inasmuch as the suit sounded in tort, and the cause of action did not arise in the district. It is not contended, but on the contrary is tacitly admitted, that the court had jurisdiction of the suit if considered as an action on the contract. The plaintiff’s pleadings are not set out in the petition for certiorari, and the magistrate did not incorporate in his answer or send up the summons in the case. This court is unable to say that the action was in tort. The meagre references in the petition for certiorari make it uncertain whether the suit should be considered as sounding in tort or in contract; and after verdict this court will give the suit such construction as will support the verdict. The judge of the superior court did not err in overruling the certiorari. See Fine v. Southern Express Co., 10 Ga. Ajpp. 161 (73 S. E. 35), and cases cited.

Judgment affirmed.

Wade, O. J., and Luhe, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

93 S.E. 254, 20 Ga. App. 673, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 1028, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/southern-railway-co-v-pitts-gactapp-1917.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack