Stromberg-Carlson Telephone Manufacturing Co. v. Bisbee

Supreme Court of Georgia

Stromberg-Carlson Telephone Manufacturing Co. v. Bisbee

41 S.E. 573, 115 Ga. 346, 1902 Ga. LEXIS 407

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedApril 26, 1902

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 41 S.E. 573 (Stromberg-Carlson Telephone Manufacturing Co. v. Bisbee) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Stromberg-Carlson Telephone Manufacturing Co. v. Bisbee, 41 S.E. 573, 115 Ga. 346, 1902 Ga. LEXIS 407 (Ga. 1902).

Pincite

Opinion

Simmons, C. J.

1. Under the ruling in Hollis v. Nelms, ante, 5, and cases cited, the judgment overruling the demurrers to the defendant’s answer was prematurely brought to this court, and can not be considered. That judgment did not dispose of the case, nor would it have been disposed of if the ruling had been as demanded. See also Zorn v. Lamar, 71 Ga. 80.

2. The motion to enter judgment for the plaintiff was properly refused, for the answer of the defendant had not been stricken. “ The sufficiency of an answer can not properly be brought in question by a motion to enter a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, based on the ground that the answer sets forth no defense.” Hollis v. Nelms, supra.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring, except Lewis, J., absent.

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