Thurman v. Walraven

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Thurman v. Walraven

85 S.E. 685, 16 Ga. App. 521, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 106

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJune 28, 1915

Docket5980

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 85 S.E. 685 (Thurman v. Walraven) 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

Thurman v. Walraven, 85 S.E. 685, 16 Ga. App. 521, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 106 (Ga. Ct. App. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

Brovxes, J.

1. The motion to dismiss the writ of error is denied. Where a bill of exceptions assigns error upon a judgment overruling a motion for a new trial, the assignment of error is sufficiently specific.

2. Where a corporation surrenders its charter, a pending suit in which it is plaintiff dies with the charter. Consequently, such a suit can not be pleaded in abatement (although it may still remain on the docket of the court) to a suit subsequently brought by an individual to whom the corporation, before the surrender of its charter, had transferred its claim against the defendant. Accordingly the court did not err in overruling the plea in abatement. Merritt v. Gate City Bank, 100 Ga. 147 (27 S. E. 979, 38 L. R. A. 149), and cases cited.

3. The evidence sustained the verdict, and the court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

4. The other assignments of error are without merit.

Judgment affirmed.

Bussell, C. J., concurs dubitante.

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

Brovxes, J.

1. The motion to dismiss the writ of error is denied. Where a bill of exceptions assigns error upon a judgment overruling a motion for a new trial, the assignment of error is sufficiently specific.

2. Where a corporation surrenders its charter, a pending suit in which it is plaintiff dies with the charter. Consequently, such a suit can not be pleaded in abatement (although it may still remain on the docket of the court) to a suit subsequently brought by an individual to whom the corporation, before the surrender of its charter, had transferred its claim against the defendant. Accordingly the court did not err in overruling the plea in abatement. Merritt v. Gate City Bank, 100 Ga. 147 (27 S. E. 979, 38 L. R. A. 149), and cases cited.

3. The evidence sustained the verdict, and the court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

4. The other assignments of error are without merit.

Judgment affirmed.

Bussell, C. J., concurs dubitante.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

85 S.E. 685, 16 Ga. App. 521, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 106, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thurman-v-walraven-gactapp-1915.

Opinion

4. The other assignments of error are without merit.

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack