Stoufer v. Missenheimer

114 S.E. 587, 29 Ga. App. 191, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 149
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided November 14, 1922·No. 13779·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Broyles, O. J.

1. There is no merit in the motion to dismiss the bill of . exceptions.

2. In a suit for damages based upon a malicious use of legal process, it must appear that the previous litigation has finally terminated against the plaintiff therein. McElreath v. Gross, 23 Ga. App. 287 (1) (98 S. E. 190).

3. In a suit where a judgment has been obtainedf and where the case has'been appealed to the reviewing court and is pending therein, the mere suing out of a garnishment based upon the judgment is not a malicious abuse of legal process. Miller v. Gay, 98 Ga. 536 (25 S. E. 577); Newman v. Coker, 150 Ga. 665 (105 S. E. 162).

4. Under the above rulings and the facts of the instant case the court did not err in dismissing the petition upon general demurrer.

Judgment affirmed.

Lüke and Bloodworth, J.J., concur.

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

Stoufer v. Missenheimer, 114 S.E. 587, 29 Ga. App. 191, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 149 (Ga. Ct. App. 1922).

114 S.E. 587 (Stoufer v. Missenheimer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Vandalsem v. Caldwell
125 S.E. 716 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1924)
Fryer v. Morrison
123 S.E. 40 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1924)