State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co. v. Davis

Court of Appeals of Georgia

State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co. v. Davis

89 S.E.2d 566, 92 Ga. App. 629, 1955 Ga. App. LEXIS 671

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 27, 1955

Docket35864

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 89 S.E.2d 566 (State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co. v. Davis) 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

State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co. v. Davis, 89 S.E.2d 566, 92 Ga. App. 629, 1955 Ga. App. LEXIS 671 (Ga. Ct. App. 1955).

Pincite

Opinion

Qtjillian, J.

1. Where the judgment of a trial court overruling a general demurrer to the petition is reversed by an appellate court, upon the return of the remittitur and before the judgment of the appellate court is made the judgment of the trial court, the plaintiff ipay offer an amendment designed to supply the deficiency of the petition. Savannah &c. Ry. Co. v. Chaney, 102 Ga. 814 (30 S. E. 437); Willis v. Manning, 195 Ga. 336 (24 S. E. 2d 194); Eagle & Phenix Mills v. Muscogee Mfg. Co., 129 Ga. 712 (1) (59 S. E. 804); Charleston &c. Ry. Co. v. Miller, 115 Ga. 92 (1) (41 S. E. 252); Ramey v. O’Byrne, 121 Ga. 516, 521 (49 S. E. 595); Jones v. Hurst, 91 Ga. 338 (3) (17 S. E. 635).

2. Where the judgment of the trial court sustaining a general demurrer to the petition is affirmed by an appellate court without direction or condition, the case is at an end. The petition can not be amended because there' is no petition in court to amend. Central R. & Bkg. Co. v. Patterson, 87 Ga. 646 (13 S. E. 525); Swindell & Co. v. Bainbridge State Bank, 4 Ga. App. 414 (1, 2) (61 S. E. 847); Kehr v. Floyd & Co., 135 Ga. 424 (69 S. E. 550); Harp v. Southern Ry. Co., 119 Ga. 927 (47 S. E. 206, 100 Am. St. R. 212). In such circumstances, after allowing an amendment to the petition, subject to the defendant’s right to demur, the trial court properly entered a judgment disallowing the amendment.

Judgment affirmed.

Felton, C. J., and Nichols, J., concur.

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

Qtjillian, J.

1. Where the judgment of a trial court overruling a general demurrer to the petition is reversed by an appellate court, upon the return of the remittitur and before the judgment of the appellate court is made the judgment of the trial court, the plaintiff ipay offer an amendment designed to supply the deficiency of the petition. Savannah &c. Ry. Co. v. Chaney, 102 Ga. 814 (30 S. E. 437); Willis v. Manning, 195 Ga. 336 (24 S. E. 2d 194); Eagle & Phenix Mills v. Muscogee Mfg. Co., 129 Ga. 712 (1) (59 S. E. 804); Charleston &c. Ry. Co. v. Miller, 115 Ga. 92 (1) (41 S. E. 252); Ramey v. O’Byrne, 121 Ga. 516, 521 (49 S. E. 595); Jones v. Hurst, 91 Ga. 338 (3) (17 S. E. 635).

2. Where the judgment of the trial court sustaining a general demurrer to the petition is affirmed by an appellate court without direction or condition, the case is at an end. The petition can not be amended because there' is no petition in court to amend. Central R. & Bkg. Co. v. Patterson, 87 Ga. 646 (13 S. E. 525); Swindell & Co. v. Bainbridge State Bank, 4 Ga. App. 414 (1, 2) (61 S. E. 847); Kehr v. Floyd & Co., 135 Ga. 424 (69 S. E. 550); Harp v. Southern Ry. Co., 119 Ga. 927 (47 S. E. 206, 100 Am. St. R. 212). In such circumstances, after allowing an amendment to the petition, subject to the defendant’s right to demur, the trial court properly entered a judgment disallowing the amendment.

Judgment affirmed.

Felton, C. J., and Nichols, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

89 S.E.2d 566, 92 Ga. App. 629, 1955 Ga. App. LEXIS 671, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-farm-mutual-automobile-ins-co-v-davis-gactapp-1955.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack