Town of East Rome v. City of Rome

58 S.E. 854, 129 Ga. 290, 1907 Ga. LEXIS 360
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedAugust 14, 1907
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 58 S.E. 854 (Town of East Rome v. City of Rome) 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
Town of East Rome v. City of Rome, 58 S.E. 854, 129 Ga. 290, 1907 Ga. LEXIS 360 (Ga. 1907).

Opinion

Cobb, P. J.

1. A municipal corporation can be sued only in the corporate name set forth in the charter. Town of Dexter v. Gay, 115 Ga. 765 (42 S. E. 94); Augusta Sou. Ry. Co. v. Tennille, 119 Ga. 804 (47 S. E. 179).

2. When the General Assembly, by an act incorporating a town, declares that it shall be “known and called the Town of East Rome,” and that the corporate name of said town shall be “The Mayor and Council of the Town of East Rome,” by which name it may sue and be sued, such a town can sue and be sued only in the name last referred to; and a suit brought in the name of “The Town of East Rome” should.be dismissed on demurrer. Town of Dexter v. Gay, supra; Acts 1882-3, p. 411.

3. A suit of the character above indicated, not being brought in the name of a natural person, a corporation, or a partnership, was a mere nullity; and there was nothing in the petition, in such a suit, to support an amendment of any character whatever. Western & Atlantic R. Co. v. Dalton Marble Works, 122 Ga. 774 (50 S. E. 978), and cases cited.

4. The petition was not amendable, as there was nothing to amend by, and the suit was a nullity; but the court should not have dismissed the same in vacation, before the return term; and the judgment will be reversed, with direction that the order of dismissal be entered in term. Ivey v. Rome, ante.

JiMgment reversed, with direction.

All the Justices concur.

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

Related

State Highway Department of Georgia v. REED, MAYOR
84 S.E.2d 561 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1954)
Darby v. Mayor &C. of Statesboro
69 S.E.2d 248 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1952)
Smith v. Commissioners of Roads & Revenue
31 S.E.2d 648 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1944)
Clemons v. Olshine
187 S.E. 711 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1936)
Storey v. Town of Summerville
123 S.E. 139 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1924)
Walker v. Mayor of East Rome
89 S.E. 204 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1916)
Bishop v. Brown
76 S.E. 89 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1912)
White v. City of Forsyth
71 S.E. 1073 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1911)
Gelders v. City of Fitzgerald
69 S.E. 569 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1910)
Fowler v. Rome Dispensary
62 S.E. 660 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1908)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
58 S.E. 854, 129 Ga. 290, 1907 Ga. LEXIS 360, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/town-of-east-rome-v-city-of-rome-ga-1907.