Vinson v. Porter

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Vinson v. Porter

191 S.E.2d 297, 126 Ga. App. 555, 1972 Ga. App. LEXIS 1212

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 31, 1972

Docket46958

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 191 S.E.2d 297 (Vinson v. Porter) 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

Vinson v. Porter, 191 S.E.2d 297, 126 Ga. App. 555, 1972 Ga. App. LEXIS 1212 (Ga. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Bell, Chief Judge.

If the defendant was a resident of Albany, Georgia at the time of the collision then service upon him cannot be obtained by the nonresident motorist statute. Davis v. Holt, 105 Ga. App. 125 (b) (123 SE2d 686). Although the defendant in his affidavit claims that at the time he and his wife took up an abode in Albany that he intended to become a permanent resident of Georgia, the *557 fact that he was in this State in compliance with Naval orders, and the fact that upon completion of his service obligation he returned to Ohio, raises an inference that he was only a temporary sojourner in Georgia, and thus a nonresident. Davis v. Holt, 105 Ga. App. 125, supra; Coggins v. Rhodes, 113 Ga. App. 837 (149 SE2d 834). Thus giving the plaintiff, the opposing party, the benefit of this favorable inference, it is clear that there is a genuine material issue of fact as to the residence of the defendant for resolution by a jury. The trial court erred in granting the motion for summary judgment.

Judgment reversed.

Eberhardt, P. J., and Evans, J., concur.

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

Bell, Chief Judge.

If the defendant was a resident of Albany, Georgia at the time of the collision then service upon him cannot be obtained by the nonresident motorist statute. Davis v. Holt, 105 Ga. App. 125 (b) (123 SE2d 686). Although the defendant in his affidavit claims that at the time he and his wife took up an abode in Albany that he intended to become a permanent resident of Georgia, the *557 fact that he was in this State in compliance with Naval orders, and the fact that upon completion of his service obligation he returned to Ohio, raises an inference that he was only a temporary sojourner in Georgia, and thus a nonresident. Davis v. Holt, 105 Ga. App. 125, supra; Coggins v. Rhodes, 113 Ga. App. 837 (149 SE2d 834). Thus giving the plaintiff, the opposing party, the benefit of this favorable inference, it is clear that there is a genuine material issue of fact as to the residence of the defendant for resolution by a jury. The trial court erred in granting the motion for summary judgment.

Judgment reversed.

Eberhardt, P. J., and Evans, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

191 S.E.2d 297, 126 Ga. App. 555, 1972 Ga. App. LEXIS 1212, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vinson-v-porter-gactapp-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack